Catholic Sensibility

At the Bench, Deacon Greg links to one of our favorite internet comedians.

Let’s take reverence down a notch or two and reduce a sacramental experience to an acronym. You know, if the clergy were forbidden from confecting the Eucharist, there would be no danger at all of profanation.

And the image, left? It’s a cub, k?

Just a caution in case anybody’s been trying to comment and hasn’t found their post …

For some reason, this site has been attracting an annoying quantity of spam comments for the past week. The usual trickle has been five to eight spams a day. But now the 24-hour count is into the several dozens.

Usually, I read through the email addresses in case an authentic comment has been waylaid by WordPress. But I have other priorities these days, and I’ve decided to just delete all spam, sight-unseen.

If, by chance, you had a comment that wasn’t posted, please email me and I’ll make sure your contribution is up within a day or two. I’m always willing to give a thoughtful commenter a larger platform. If you want to communicate with me and set something up, or ask for my input on something, I’m generally willing to entertain all suggestions. Especially if we can get serious about it in two weeks.

Also, I’m open to people commenting on funeral readings. You can email me with your intent and I can give you an assignment. I have forthcoming essays from FrMichael, Neil, and Fran in the pipeline. I’m sure our readers would appreciate hearing from regulars like Jim or Liam if they were willing to write up a pastoral/liturgical reflection. The general parameters would be fairly wide: anything that might help people decide on a reading and personal stories or connections would be welcome.

An explicit admission of our Catholic snail’s pace:

47. The Church, while ever containing in herself the fullness of the means of salvation, always operates “by slow stages”. (Ad Gentes 6b) The conciliar decree Ad Gentes clarifies well the dynamic of the process of evangelization: Christian witness, dialogue and presence in charity (11-12), the proclamation of the Gospel and the call to conversion (13), the catechumenate and Christian Initiation (14), the formation of the Christian communities through and by means of the sacraments and their ministers (15-18). (113) This is the dynamic for establishing and building up the Church.

(113) In the dynamism of evangelization a distinction must be made between “initial situations” (initia), “gradual developments” (gradus) and situations of maturity: “appropriate acts must correspond to condition and state” (AG 6).

All kidding aside, Ad Gentes is crucial to get the Church’s whole view of evangelization. The section cited we examined years ago on this web site. It works for a parish, new or established, as well as in an explicitly missionary situation. How so?

A faith community offers an example of the Christian life. Individuals and groups invite non-believers to dialogue, a mutual exploration of human hopes and dreams. Christian witness is reinforced through an active part in the local community, through caritas, which I would interpret in the whole sense of the original term: a love for others demonstrated with shared sacrifice and shouldering of burdens. In other words, Christ’s urging to his followers in Matthew 25:31ff. Believers need not worry about going off the rails into the mode of providing social services as long as they are convinced of finding Christ’s presence among those in need.

Once trust has been established, the proclamation of the Good News can occur with fruit when those listening are convinced they are conversing with companions who know and love them, and who have demonstrated they will be true friends. If a person can be trusted with small matters of charity, friendship, and companionship, then perhaps the setting is right for taking a deeper step toward conversion.

These steps work well for alienated Christians and inactive Catholics. Can bitterness be overcome? I would hope we Catholic believe it. Otherwise, why do we operate with a sacrament of reconciliation? And speaking of sacraments, GDC 47 acknowledges the importance of liturgy and the sacraments in building up and sustaining the local community, and by extension, the Church.

While the Church does not deny an intellectual component of its evangelization efforts, note how minimized it is in GDC 47. It is a part of what we offer to non-believers. But it is hardly the whole, or even the main part of the picture. Church teaching as elucidated here, is part of the reason why I find much in modern Catholic apologetics rather off the rails, and at its worst, more an occasion of intellectual narcissism, rather than a true evangelical effort. Agree or disagree?

At the US Bishops’ site, you can access the full text of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal. Today, we finish up the introduction to the 2000 GIRM. This section, you’ll recall, was an addition to the previous edition of the GIRM. As we’ve read through it, it has laid some groundwork for what is to come, and also has referenced the current situation in the Church. To a degree, GIRM 15 also summarizes the prior fourteen sections.

15. In this manner the Church, while remaining faithful to her office as teacher of truth, safeguarding “things old,” that is, the deposit of tradition, fulfills at the same time the duty of examining and prudently adopting “things new” (cf. Mt 13:52).

For part of the new Missal orders the prayers of the Church in a way more open to the needs of our times. Of this kind are above all the Ritual Masses and Masses for Various Needs, in which tradition and new elements are appropriately brought together. Thus, while a great number of expressions, drawn from the Church’s most ancient tradition and familiar through the many editions of the Roman Missal, have remained unchanged, numerous others have been accommodated to the needs and conditions proper to our own age, and still others, such as the prayers for the Church, for the laity, for the sanctification of human labor, for the community of all nations, and certain needs proper to our era, have been newly composed, drawing on the thoughts and often the very phrasing of the recent documents of
the Council.

On account, moreover, of the same attitude toward the new state of the world as it now is, it seemed to cause no harm at all to so revered a treasure if some phrases were changed so that the language would be in accord with that of modern theology and would truly reflect the current state of the Church’s discipline. Hence, several expressions regarding the evaluation and use of earthly goods have been changed, as have several which alluded to a certain form of outward penance which was proper to other periods of the Church’s past.

In this way, finally, the liturgical norms of the Council of Trent have certainly been completed and perfected in many particulars by those of the Second Vatican Council, which has carried into effect the efforts to bring the faithful closer to the Sacred Liturgy that have been taken up these last four centuries and especially those of recent times, and above all the attention to the Liturgy promoted by St. Pius X and his Successors.

Two brief comments, then yours:

Note the positive regard of the combination of “tradition and new elements.”

Note also that while Tridentine liturgical norms have been referenced and affirmed, the Church also views them as incomplete and imperfect in terms of their ability to bring people closer to the liturgy. The Church views liturgical reform as an ongoing effort, in that Pius X is referenced, and in so doing, affirms that liturgical reform and renewal did not begin with Vatican II. It is an exercise with which we will likely never find satisfaction in this life.

What observations have you had all so far?

This is a key section of the General Directory for Catechesis. Casual readers, and perhaps too many bishops and clergy, who expect the transmission of faith to be focused on classroom learning and catechetical preaching, err gravely by overlooking the essence of cooperating with God’s relevation to the world. This footnote appended to the title of this section is very illustrative:

Dei Verbum and the Catechism of the Catholic Church (nn. 150-175) speak of faith as a response to Revelation. In this context, for catechetical pastoral motivation, it is preferred to associate faith more with Evangelization than with Revelation in so far as the latter, in fact, reaches (people) normally by way of the evangelical mission of the Church.

The evangelical mission is primary. Catholics who have gone astray in speaking of a smaller, purer Church will likely achieve only the quality of smallness. They have no guarantee of purity–the nature of sin and human fallibility gives ample illustration of that. And they will cease being a Church by the very rejection and denial of the evangelical mission demanded of believers. GDC 46 doesn’t hesitate to throw down the gauntlet: we exist in order to evangelize. We do not exist for ourselves. We do not exist to edify a God who clearly has far wider and grace-filled intentions than catering to sycophants focused on their own status.

46. The Church “exists in order to evangelize” (Evangelii Nuntiandi 14) that is “the carrying forth of the Good News to every sector of the human race so that by its strength it may enter into the hearts of (people) and renew the human race”. (Evangelii Nuntiandi 18)

The missionary mandate of Jesus to evangelize has various aspects, all of which, however, are closely connected with each other: “proclaim”, (Mk 16,15) “make disciples and teach”, (cf. Mt 28:19-20) “be my witnesses”, (Acts 1:8) “baptize”, (Mt 28:19) “do this in memory of me”, (Lk 22,19) “love one another” (Jn 15,12) Proclamation, witness, teaching, sacraments, love of neighbour: all of these aspects are the means by which the one Gospel is transmitted and they constitute the essential elements of evangelization itself.

Indeed they are so important that, at times, there is a tendency to identify them with the action of evangelization. However, “no such definition can be accepted for that complex, rich and dynamic reality which is called evangelization”. (Evangelii Nuntiandi 17) There is the risk of impoverishing it or even of distorting it. Evangelization, on the contrary, must develop its “totality” (Evangelii Nuntiandi 28) and completely incorporate its intrinsic bipolarity: witness and proclamation, (cf. Evangelii Nuntiandi 22a) word and sacrament, (cf. Evangelii Nuntiandi 47b) interior change and social transformation. (cf. Evangelii Nuntiandi 18) Those who evangelize have a “global vision” (Evangelii Nuntiandi 24d) of evangelization and identify with the overall mission of the Church. (cf. Evangelii Nuntiandi 14)

You can see the heavy influence of Pope Paul’s apostolic exhortation Evangelii Nuntiandi in this section. And naturally, the actual call of Christ from the New Testament.

If this were a live parish workshop, we could easily spend an entire workshop on GDC 46 and discuss the paths for our particular faith community. So what does it mean for you readers and your faith communities, and even the internet Catholic community to suggest we exist mainly for evangelization?

GDC 46b would have us ask which of these missionary aspects is my forte or my community’s strength? For a community, the reflection should naturally lead us to consider which is weakest, and how that weakness might be remedied. It might be too much to suggest any single believer be a preacher, a catechist, involved in liturgy and charity and social justice. But a healthy community certainly needs all of these. It would be incumbent on any pastoral ministry to ensure all of these missionary aspects are strong in a parish or diocese. This is not a matter of “discernment,” but a mandate from the Biblical witness of the Lord himself.

GDC 46c cautions us–rightly–that we cannot boil down the evangelical ministry into these categories easily. I love the expression of “bipolarity.” Many aspects of ministry are deliciously combined. I can attest that through staff colleagues and parishioners, my experiences in ministry have been enriched by people’s strengths. It enables us, in these various combinations, to serve more fully the needs of the proclamation of the Gospel. It works against the human tendency to narcissism, to thinking of “my” ministry, “my” efforts.

After taking some time to ponder this very rich section, especially perhaps its Scriptural roots (and doesn’t it make you want to read Evangelii Nuntiandi?) what have you readers to say? Advocates of a smaller, purer church, do you feel dismayed or challenged? And for all: how does this mandate of missionary focus align with your faith community’s actual efforts?

Talk it up, if you wish–this is as good as it gets in Church documentation.

Jimmy Mac sent me a link to this review of a review of MR3. With all the fuss about “proper” and “accurate” and “authentic” language, maybe it’s time to retire a few odious terms that are still stinking up the place. Brother Daniel starts me thinking:

Some of the problems are basic like the narrator’s frequent use of the phrase “say the mass,” when one does not “say” the mass, but prays the mass. That isn’t just a some insignificant distinction or nit-picking, but reflects an operative sacramental theology and theology of the eucharist, ministry and church.

This is good.

I’ll retire “you,” and replace it with “spirit.” But it turn, I’d like to see two expressions excised from Conservative Catholic vocabulary for suspect theology and spiritual practice:

say the Mass

assist at Mass

I think even my musical foils at CMAA would agree that the first phrase is akin to passing gas at a floral show. Even aside from the ideal sung Mass, that phrase conjures up the old notion that all one has to do is pronounce the words and grace happens. Clerical pelagianism and overtones of magic we do not need. Something more is needed.

And say, while we’re at it, let’s excise “assist” too. Wayne Gretzky was the master of assisting. The proper term is “participate.” We participate in Christ’s worship of the Father. On one level, to suggest we help the Mass along in any way by helping “father” is another kind of subtle but smarmy pelagianism.

In light of imprudent policies put into place by bishops in Phoenix and perhaps Madison, this portion of the GIRM is very illuminating:

Above all, the Second Vatican Council, which recommended “that more perfect form of participation in the Mass by which the faithful, after the Priest’s Communion, receive the Lord’s Body from the same Sacrifice,”[SC 55] called for another desire of the Fathers of Trent to be put into effect, namely, that for the sake of a fuller participation in the Holy Eucharist “at each Mass the faithful present should communicate not only by spiritual desire but also by sacramental reception of the Eucharist.”[20]

14. Prompted by the same intention and pastoral zeal, the Second Vatican Council was able to give renewed consideration to what was established by Trent on Communion under both kinds. And indeed, since nowadays the doctrinal principles on the complete efficacy of Eucharistic Communion received under the species of bread alone are not in any way called into question, the Council gave permission for the reception on occasion of Communion under both kinds, because this clearer form of the sacramental sign offers a particular opportunity for understanding more deeply the mystery in which the faithful participate.[SC 55]

[20] Ecumenical Council of Trent, Session XXII, Doctrina de ss. Missae sacrificio, September 17, 1562, chapter 6: Denz-Schön, no. 1747.

So let’s be clear about what the Church actually does say about Communion. The “clearer form” does not impart more grace, but it does offer a “particular opportunity” for a deeper understanding about the Paschal Mystery. GIRM 14 phrases it with the catechetical or rational term, “understanding.” But the perception of the Mystery of God is something that transcends brains that know. The bishops, at the very least, should realize they are legislating policy on realities that go far deeper than their understanding. Some notable few speak in terms of a lack of respect or reverence for holy things or holy people. But on a much deeper level, God’s grace will manage to move around human boundaries. God’s movement will detour around the sacramental obstacles imprudent leaders will throw up at the faithful.

That’s not to say I don’t find problems in the way GIRM 14 expresses a Catholic understanding of the sacraments and of the opportunity for grace in the liturgical context. But clearly, the mainstream of curial thinking is not quite where those few bishops are.

CNS headlines its Friday with another episode in the ongoing and seemingly endless tussle between bishops and theologians.

At some point, players and spectators alike are going to tire of this. Which inning are we playing? Who said what? Who’s pitching now? Who’s on third?

Professor Johnson:

(The USCCB committee) takes sentences and, despite my written clarifications to the contrary, makes them conclude to positions that I have not taken and would never take. The committee’s reading projects meanings, discovers insinuations, and otherwise distorts the text so that in some instances I do not recognize the book I wrote. This October statement paints an incorrect picture of the fundamental line of thought the book develops.

This happens quite often in politics these days. Also in the Church. People in an adversarial situation engage in caricature, and at times seem more than willing to think the worst of a person.

Cardinal Wuerl, for his part, seems willing to meet.

I reiterate my offer as chairman of the doctrine committee to meet with Sister Johnson. As a woman religious and theologian, she is a valued member of the church. Her goal of helping people come to an even better understanding of who God is, is a goal we share.

One would think this is important enough for a face-to-face meeting. Until that happens–an event both sides have publicly stated they are willing to do–it would seem that continuing rounds of misunderstanding themselves do harm to the teaching ministry of the Church. People in conflict speak of shared goals. It seems this would require a mediator to break through the deadlock.

Enough of public statements. The bishops can’t stop this book from being printed, sold, read, and discussed–no matter what they say about it. Their insistence is likely to make Professor Johnson’s publisher quite happy for the bottom line. And traditionalists in the cheering section are happy whenever men take on women in the Church. That’s not likely to change. Nothing changes, and nobody’s being convinced.

So again I ask: why are we continuing to see this play out in the public sphere?

This is a long title and post, but I thought it better to oversee the whole line of thinking in these sections:

42. The Revelation of God, culminating in Jesus Christ, is destined for all mankind: “He (God) desires all (people) to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Tim 2,4) (Dei Verbum 7) In virtue of his universal salvific will, God has ordained that Revelation should be transmitted to all peoples and to all generations and should remain always in its entirety.

God’s plan for human salvation is universal. How is this Revelation to be transmitted? By human activity, of course: the evangelical outreach of believers. Hence the Church:

43. To fulfill this divine plan, Jesus Christ founded the Church, built on the Apostles. He gave them the Holy Spirit from the Father and sent them to preach the Gospel to the whole world. The Apostles, by words, deeds and writings, faithfully discharged this task.(Dei Verbum 7a)

The Church exists not for itself, but to achieve the mission of Christ. That would be the faithful transmission of the message of God’s love for all people.

Note that we are all charged with this mission, laity and clergy alike:

This Apostolic Tradition is perpetuated in the Church by means of the Church herself. The entire Church, pastors and faithful, is responsible for its conservation and transmission. The Gospel is conserved whole and entire in the Church: the disciples of Jesus Christ contemplate it and meditate upon it unceasingly; they live it out in their everyday lives; they proclaim it in their missionary activity. As the Church lives the Gospel she is continually made fruitful by the Holy Spirit. The Spirit causes her to grow constantly in her understanding of the Gospel, prompts her and sustains the task of proclaiming the Gospel in every corner of the world.(Dei Verbum 8 & CCC 75-79)

This is an enormous responsibility. Yet do believers take it seriously? Are they even told this is the whole point of the Christian life? To contemplate the Gospel and proclaim it by word and deed?

44. The integral conservation of Revelation, the word of God contained in Tradition and Scripture, as well as its continuous transmission, are guaranteed in their authenticity. The Magisterium of the Church, sustained by the Holy Spirit and endowed with “the sure charism of truth”,(Dei Verbum 10b; cf CCC 85-87) exercises the function of “authentically interpreting the word of God”.(Lumen Gentium 44, Ad Gentes 1, Gaudium et Spes 45; cf. CCC 774-776)

45. The Church, “universal sacrament of salvation”, born of the Holy Spirit, transmits Revelation through evangelization; she announces the Good News of the salvific plan of the Father and in the sacraments, communicates his Diving gifts.

To God who reveals himself is due this obedience of faith by which (people) adheres to the “Gospel of the grace of God”. (Acts 20,24) with full assent of the intellect and of the will. Guided by faith, by means of the gift of the Spirit, (humankind) succeeds in attaining to contemplate and to delight in the God of love, who in Christ has revealed the riches of his glory.(cf. Col 1:26)

This is worth taking slowly.

The Church’s quality of apostolicity is one of leadership–on one level. But it is also a quality in evidence in ordinary believers. When we give good example, when we preach, we continue the apostolic tradition. The Holy Spirit guides. But the laity are the tools. Or one might say the icons of apostolicity, at least when we are living the Christian life in such a convincing way that others are drawn to Christ.

How do we best take upon ourselves this mantle? GDC 42 suggests we remain aware of the intent of God to save all people. All are welcome to encounter Christ. GDC 43 charts out the ordinary course of the Christian life: not only are we to learn the Gospel, but we are to live it. The Holy Spirit ensures people watch, notice, and are nudged toward conversion. GDC 44 affirms the role of the bishops and theologians. That is a huge responsibility, one for which I’m glad I only have to worry about giving good example.

And finally, GDC 45 reminds us of the sacramental nature of evangelization. In a sacrament, we encounter Christ. We become aware of his presence. We are soaked more deeply in the opportunity of grace,

Thoughts on any of this?

Some few but loud Catholics stake their flag on the Latin/vernacular hill, suggesting that the modern Roman Rite has gone off the rails by extending the prescriptions of Sacrosanctum Concilium (SC) to an unlawful extreme. Almost always, this shows a lack of understanding, and a position contrary to the Magisterium itself.

12. Hence, the Second Vatican Council, having come together in order to accommodate the Church to the requirements of her proper apostolic office precisely in these times, considered thoroughly, as had the Council of Trent, the catechetical and pastoral character of the Sacred Liturgy.[SC 33] And since no Catholic would now deny a sacred rite celebrated in Latin to be legitimate and efficacious, the Council was also able to concede that “not rarely adopting the vernacular language may be of great usefulness for the people” and gave permission for it to be used.[SC 36] The eagerness with which this measure was everywhere received has certainly been so great that it has led, under the guidance of the Bishops and the Apostolic See itself, to permission for all liturgical celebrations in which the people participate to be in the vernacular, so that the people may more fully understand the mystery which is celebrated.

13. In this regard, although the use of the vernacular in the Sacred Liturgy is a means, admittedly of great importance, for expressing more clearly catechesis on the mystery, a catechesis inherent in the celebration itself, the Second Vatican Council ordered additionally that certain prescriptions of the Council of Trent that had not been followed everywhere be brought to fruition, such as the Homily to be given on Sundays and feast days[SC 52] and the faculty to interject certain explanations during the sacred rites themselves.[SC 35.3]

I wouldn’t agree that catechesis is the only reason for a vernacular liturgy. Certainly there is spiritual benefit from direct communication in the way worshipers relate to God and to one another in their earthly surroundings. Catechesis might imply that the Mass exists to impart knowledge to the mortal assembly. We can be pretty sure that the Son’s expression of praise to the Father is independent of any particular human language.

The division of the GIRM is peculiar in number 13, as the topic of Communion of the people is taken up in mid-section. We’ll get to that topic tomorrow. Meanwhile, any comments on the vernacular?

My artistic director thinks a dead husband in Sarah’s bed will help things along. Read it from Tobit 3:7-9:

On that very day, at Ecbatana in Media, it so happened that Raguel’s daughter Sarah also had to listen to reproaches from one of her father’s maids. For she had been given in marriage to seven husbands, but the wicked demon Asmodeus kept killing them off before they could have intercourse with her, as is prescribed for wives. The maid said to her: “You are the one who kills your husbands! Look! You have already been given in marriage to seven husbands, but you do not bear the name of a single one of them. Why do you beat us? Because your husbands are dead? Go, join them! May we never see son or daughter of yours!”

We found our “dead husband” after Mass tonight. When I noticed the young woman playing Asmodeus walk by, I pointed her out to husband #7. She’s a nice person, definitely playing a role out of character. But she laughed at the newest cast member, and pointed at him, saying, “Ah keel you.”

All in good fun.

After my daughter read the servants’ insults in last Fall’s reading session, I thought this short passage needed its own song. Not just to give a few supporting cast members a small plum, but to keep the story moving along in music:

Blankets and bed sheets can’t hide the whiff,
can’t hide the husband: here is the stiff!

God’s new covenant is at the center of Christianity. The consequences for Christian believers are obvious, but it also impacts how we view non-believers. Christianity is not just a sect that follows a great teacher. Faith compels us to something more:

41. The ministry of the word must always give prominence to this wonderful characteristic, proper to the economy of Revelation: the Son of God enters human history, assumes human life and death, and brings about the new and definitive covenant between God and man. It is the task of catechesis to show who Jesus Christ is, his life and ministry, and to present the Christian faith as the following of his person.(90) Consequently, it must base itself constantly on the Gospels, which “are the heart of all the Scriptures ‘because they are our principal source for the life and teaching of the Incarnate Word, our Saviour’”.(91)

The fact that Jesus Christ is the fullness of Revelation is the foundation for the “Christocentricity” (92) of catechesis: the mystery of Christ, in the revealed message, is not another element alongside others, it is rather the centre from which all other elements are structured and illuminated.

(90) Cf. Catechesi Tradendae 5; CCC 520 and 2053.

(91) CCC 125, which refers to Dei Verbum 18.

(92) Catechesi Tradendae 5. The Theme of Christocentrism, is explained in “The object of catechesis: communion with Jesus Christ” (Part I Chapter 3) and in “The Christocentricity of the Gospel Message (Part II, Chapter 1).

Christ is at the center of catechesis–not just knowledge and learning, but the whole effort of evangelism. By extension, every aspect of Christian activity should reflect this centrality. Impossible to put into effect, but an ideal for which to strive.

The GIRM gives some history on the 15th century council’s important, but misguided determination:

11. The Council of Trent had already recognized the great catechetical usefulness contained in the celebration of Mass but was unable to bring out all its consequences in regard to actual practice. In fact, many at that time requested that permission be given to use the vernacular in celebrating the Eucharistic Sacrifice. To such a request, the Council, by reason of the circumstances of that age, judged it a matter of duty to answer by insisting once more on the teaching of the Church as had been handed on, according to which the Eucharistic Sacrifice is in the first place the action of Christ himself, whose inherent efficacy is therefore unaffected by the manner in which the faithful participate in it. The Council for this reason stated in these firm and likewise measured words: “Although the Mass contains much instruction for the faithful people, it did not seem to the Fathers expedient, however, that it be celebrated indiscriminately in the vernacular.”[12] And the Council declared worthy of censure anyone maintaining that “the rite of the Roman Church, in which part of the Canon and the words of consecration are pronounced in a low voice, is to be condemned, or that the Mass must be celebrated only in the vernacular.”[13] Nevertheless, at the same time as it prohibited the use of the vernacular in the Mass, it ordered, on the other hand, pastors of souls to put appropriate catechesis in its place: “Lest Christ’s flock go hungry . . . the Holy Synod commands pastors and each and all of those others having the care of souls that frequently during the celebration of Mass, either personally or through others, they should explain what is read at Mass; and expound, among other things, something of the mystery of this most holy Sacrifice, especially on Sundays and feast days.”[14]

[12] Ecumenical Council of Trent, Session XXII, Doctrina de ss. Missae sacrificio, September 17, 1562, chapter 8: Denz-Schön, no. 1749.

[13] Ecumenical Council of Trent, Session XXII, Doctrina de ss. Missae sacrificio, September 17, 1562, chapter 9: Denz-Schön, no. 1759.

[14] Ecumenical Council of Trent, Session XXII, Doctrina de ss. Missae sacrificio, September 17, 1562, chapter 8: Denz-Schön, no. 1749.

In hindsight, it is easy to characterize this as a political judgment in search of a theological justification. Trent accomplished much, but the bishops convened for it also missed opportunities. Even if they did provide for the homily on Sundays and feast days.

PrayTell reports on the Cincinnati archbishop’s letter to clergy referencing Phoenix and Madison:

Having contacted the Secretariat for Divine Worship at the USCCB, I was informed that it is not a matter of the indult expiring. Rather the indult has been supplanted by The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (283)

So much for the indult-expiration reason. It was flimsy enough before this important clarification.

This web site will eventually get to GIRM 283. Good to know that at least one bishop is getting a solid opinion on the GIRM. But it all seems pretty clear.

Now, it is true that the GIRM permits a bishop to set local norms. The question always remains: are drastic changes to existing norms advisable?

As a parent, I can alter norms on say, my daughter’s weekly allowance. If chores are not getting done, I might withhold money. Maybe even all of it, if I think she should be earning spending money from child-sitting and checkout at the local grocery store. But maybe it would be wise to consult my wife first. Or negotiate with the young miss. Or consider the witness of the apostle:

Fathers, do not provoke your children, so they may not become discouraged.

Just ask some of your good Catholic fathers (and mothers), bishops. You’ll get better advice than you will from the careerism crew in the Vatican, or on the net.

The middle paragraph of this section summarizes the Paschal Mystery–the completion and apex of God’s self-revelation in himan history:

40. God revealed himself progressively to (humankind), through the prophets and through salvific events, until he brought to completion his self-revelation by sending his own Son: (Heb 1:1-2)

“[Jesus Christ] completed and perfected Revelation, he did this by way of his presence and self manifestation—by words and works, signs and miracles, but above all by his death and glorious resurrection from the dead, and finally by sending the Spirit of truth”.(Dei Verbum 4)

Jesus Christ is not merely the greatest of the prophets but is the eternal Son of God, made man. He is, therefore, the final event towards which all the events of salvation history converge.(Cf. Lk 24:27) He is indeed “the Father’s one, perfect and unsurpassable Word”.(89)

(89) CCC 65; St John of the Cross puts it as follows: “He has told us everything at once in this one Word” (“The Ascent of Mount Carmel” 2,22; cf. The Liturgy of Hours, I, Office of Readings for Monday of the Second week of Advent).

Quoting a mystic like Juan de la Cruz: very good. We need more of this mystical witness in the effort of evangelization.