Catholic Sensibility

Busy day today. First Reconciliation this morning. Thirteen second-graders, plus family. Still out of the church, so our lower lounge, ordinarily the setting for social life and large group catechesis, filled in as a space for worship.

Left, one of four confessor stations.

Catholics devote lots of pen and internet strokes to the orientation of the priest at Mass. I’ve never seen any discussion of the orientation at Penance. The old confessional booth usually finds the priest facing at right angles from the penitent, who is usually oriented toward the confessor.

Outside of the booth and leaving the screen behind, what orientation makes sense? Different priests I’ve worked with have different opinions. One liked to have the chairs facing each other. That is the way the “face-to-face” option is usually set up in the reconciliation chapel upstairs. Other confessors opt for side-by-side.

When we’re in our church, some stations are set up in pews, so the orientation is more the former. Otherwise, I angle the chairs at ninety degree, as imaged here.

Which makes sense given the Catholic understanding of Penance? Would some arrangements, and some clergy attitudes, cloud the action of Christ in the sacrament?

Pastor loses the election. Takes it out on a teenager, who, to his credit, wants no bitterness for the Church on his account:

I don’t want the church to be put down. I don’t want the Catholic religion to be put down. It’s just the way the priest has things running. He’s so strict. He won’t loosen up about things.

The lessons of the day continue. Lots of the Catholic commentariat on the net suggest this problem is solved by more/better knowledge and information. Naturally, whenever anyone disagrees with the conservative status quo, it’s about the poor dumb lay people. Don’t know about that. I still haven’t heard anything explicitly immoral about civil unions that’s not already permitted by law, or lack thereof. So do we have a schism? If so, I don’t think it will ever get as obvious as it did in the days when secular police enforced things with physical coercion.

The GIRM bolsters the US bishops on

§ 164 § As in the case of styles of architecture, there is no particular style for sacred furnishings for the liturgy.(GIRM 325) Sacred vessels may be in “a shape that is in keeping with the culture of each region, provided each type of vessel is suited to the intended liturgical use and is clearly distinguished from [utensils] for every day use.”(GIRM 332) Materials used for sacred vessels such as the chalice and paten should be worthy, solid, and durable, and should not break easily. Chalices and cups used for the distribution of the Precious Blood should have bowls made of nonabsorbent material. Vessels made from metal are gilded on the inside if the metal ordinarily rusts. The vestments worn by ministers symbolize the ministers’ functions and add beauty to the celebration of the rites. “In addition to traditional materials, natural fabrics proper to the [local area] may be used for making vestments; . . . The beauty and nobility of a vestment arises from its material and design rather than from lavish ornamentation.”(GIRM 343-344)

These are sensible guidelines. We should be aware that the institutional church now prefers precious metals. As for vestments, the notion of beauty and nobility being derived from material and design refers to Vatican II’s Sacrosanctum Concilium.

§ 165 § Conferences of bishops may make further determinations regarding the appropriate style and material for sacred vessels and vestments to be used in the celebration of the liturgy.(GIRM 329; Cf. SC 128) Likewise, the diocesan bishop can make further determinations regarding the suitability of the materials or the design for vessels and vestments, and, in cases of doubt, he is the judge of what is appropriate in this regard.(The Appendix to the General Instruction for the Dioceses of the United States (1975), nos. 288 and 305)

Some of this has been railroaded off by the curia.

All texts from Built of Living Stones are copyright © 2000, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

One of the more curious strategies I’ve encountered over the years has been the “anonymous” vocation discernment group. Boston seems to be moving beyond that trend, in its “collaborative” (see cluster) plan.

Each collaborative will develop a plan for identifying candidates for the priesthood, praying with them and mentoring them to accept vocations.

I think it’s up to any individual to determine how “public” to make their discernment. When I was in such a group for a year, I told many people. I told the woman I was dating–it seemed only fair. We maintained a close friendship that, on the romance front, didn’t “go anywhere” because of my own being up-in-the-air. My friend was respectful of that. But by the time I had given the men’s group a year and assessed I was not seminary-bound, my friend discerned another path, too. The line from the Billy Joel song came to mind …

A girl like that won’t tell you what you should do.

I don’t think they have material in the psalms to cover those kinds of romance-lost experiences.

Once when I spoke with a young priest who was leading such a group a few years ago, I asked about the “secrecy” surrounding his guys. He said that some “girlfriends” might not appreciate the participation of some of the guys. Girlfriends? What’s that other song’s line? “Things that make you go, ‘hmm.’”

Anyway, it seems that there’s a potential loss either way you go. Do vocations flourish in support or secrecy? Does one approach fit all? Do we assume that young women are hostile to the possibilities for their boyfriends? Whatever candidates might avoid in terms of criticism or lack of support, they might gain in encouragement, as Boston seems to be aiming. I know there are a few clergy reading this. Is there a separate conservative and progressive approach? I’m curious if it falls along the lines of traditional/private/pessimistic and liberal/open/optimistic. Cardinal Mahony supporters, line it up, and hush.

John Paul II leads off today’s reflection:

§ 161 § Artists bridge the worlds of the visible and the mysterious invisible. They focus upon items with specific shapes, sizes, weights, densities, colors, forms, and textures. At the same time, they utilize materials that struggle to express ideas and concepts, visions, and imaginative constructions. Even as they nourish the senses with beauty, they also disclose the “transcendent value” and the “aura of mystery” in the Christian message.(Letter to Artists 12)

We’ve got to take a close look at his letter, don’t you think?

§ 162 § Artists choose materials with integrity because they will endure from generation to generation, because they are noble enough for holy actions, and because they express what is most respected and beautiful in the lives and cultures of the community. Materials, colors, shapes, and designs that are of short-lived popularity are unworthy. In addition to eliminating unsuitable materials, artists and communities should be cautious and discerning about promoting features closely identified with the values and attitudes of any class, ethnic, or age group to the exclusion of others in the community.

The reflection on endurance and nobility are important. Depending on your parish, it might yet need to embrace this principle, or it may have done so two generations ago. The embrace of endurance and nobility often operates independently of the progressive/conservative track. Before BLS, an intentional community, one already committed to quality and beauty in liturgy, will likely have addressed this in its works of art.

§ 163 § Similarly, artworks consisting of technological and interactive media, such as video and other electronically fabricated images, may also be appropriate for sacred purposes. Subject to the same criteria of suitability as other sacred art, technologically produced works of art can point toward sacred realities even though they do not possess the more enduring form, color, texture, weight, and density found in more traditional sacred art.

As for technological fabrication, I would say proceed with caution. Simple video and audio are likely not enough to bear the weight of mystery. It will surely have to be something deeper, something creative of the medium itself, and not just a reproduction of an attractive image or sound. That would be a false presentation, in my opinion. Unworthy of liturgy, however well done it might be.

All texts from Built of Living Stones are copyright © 2000, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

One request from way back in July was to look at evangelization as a continuation of this site’s observance of The Year of Faith. I suppose a peek at the documents going in and coming out of last month’s synod is a thought. I think that Pope Benedict will be writing up a serious summary of the input, plus his reflections. I will be posting now and then on evangelization methods and experiences from our campus parish.

Otherwise, any suggestions?

1975 was a holy year dedicated to reconciliation, hence, this connection:

81. This then, brothers and sons and daughters, is our heartfelt plea. It echoes the voice of our brethren assembled for the Third General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops. This is the task we have wished to give you at the close of a Holy Year which has enabled us to see better than ever the needs and the appeals of a multitude of brethren, both Christians and non-Christians, who await from the Church the Word of salvation.

May the light of the Holy Year, which has shone in the local Churches and in Rome for millions of consciences reconciled with God, continue to shine in the same way after the Jubilee through a program of pastoral action with evangelization as its basic feature, for these years which mark the eve of a new century, the eve also of the third millennium of Christianity.

A final dedication:

82. This is the desire that we rejoice to entrust to the hands and the heart of the Immaculate Blessed Virgin Mary, on this day which is especially consecrated to her and which is also the tenth anniversary of the close of the Second Vatican Council. On the morning of Pentecost she watched over with her prayer the beginning of evangelization prompted by the Holy Spirit: may she be the Star of the evangelization ever renewed which the Church, docile to her Lord’s command, must promote and accomplish, especially in these times which are difficult but full of hope!

In the name of Christ we bless you, your communities, your families, all those who are dear to you, in the words which Paul addressed to the Philippians: “I give thanks to my God every time I think of you- which is constantly, in every prayer I utter- rejoicing, as I plead on your behalf, at the way you have all continually helped to promote the gospel…. I hold all of you dear- you who…are sharers of my gracious lot…to defend the solid grounds on which the gospel rests. God himself can testify how much I long for each of you with the affection of Christ Jesus!”[Phil 1:3-4, 7-8.]

So, what do you think? A different kind of document from the style of John Paul II and Benedict XVI–more rambling and at times, more optimistic. Concerns and cautions, too, a decade out from Vatican II. A sign of a Church not quite at ease with the momentous changes within and outside its walls. But here at least, it was aware of the importance and challenges of evangelization. Care to share any impressions from the whole of the document?

We’re getting into a discussion of bishops ensuring a good relationship between artists and the demands of the liturgy.

§ 158 § The role of the Church is to educate artists in the appropriate relationships between their personal approach to art and the needs of the liturgy. The role of artists is to explore the powerful personal resonances that exist between sacred art, interior devotion, and the public life of the community. An essential ingredient for a successful marriage between the artistic needs of the Church and the creative talent of the artist is the ability to collaborate. Artists must cultivate the capacity to work with the leaders and people of the local community and within the frameworks established by the universal Church if they are to have the opportunity to use their talents to fashion beautiful objects that will enliven the worship of the community.

The bishops cite collaboration, and it is, of course, vital. Artists work with secular and liturgical specialists:

§ 159 § Artists who collaborate with architects and liturgical consultants need to make an honest assessment of several key elements, attending to the way the objects will be placed within the building, how the works will be integrated with the architecture of the church and with its local setting, and the ways the Christian community moves within its space.

Sensible advice on lighting, acoustics, cleaning, and other elements:

§ 160 § Attention should also be given to the way artistic objects influence acoustics and other functional elements within the building and, at the same time, to the ways in which various elements, especially lighting, may affect the objects. In addition, consideration must be given to how easily an object can be cleaned and maintained.

A good reminder that the best art doesn’t happen in isolation from other aspects, either liturgical or matters of the suyrrounding space. Art doesn’t get dropped in from heaven. All the time, anyway.

All texts from Built of Living Stones are copyright © 2000, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

We Catholics have the message. But do we have the ability to overcome the obstacles we ourselves place in front of the Gospel?

80. Our appeal here is inspired by the fervor of the greatest preachers and evangelizers, whose lives were devoted to the apostolate. Among these we are glad to point out those whom we have proposed to the veneration of the faithful during the course of the Holy Year. They have known how to overcome many obstacles to evangelization.

Such obstacles are also present today, and we shall limit ourself to mentioning the lack of fervor. It is all the more serious because it comes from within. It is manifested in fatigue, disenchantment, compromise, lack of interest and above all lack of joy and hope. We exhort all those who have the task of evangelizing, by whatever title and at whatever level, always to nourish spiritual fervor[Cf. Rom 12:11]

And how do we nourish this fervor? One obvious key is respect for the various gifts and offices that have a role. In my experience, clergy are often weak in this. Many lay ecclesial ministers serve with a lack of respect and regard–and that doesn’t even begin to touch the ordinary parishioners who, after all, are in the front lines of evangelization in the world.

This fervor demands first of all that we should know how to put aside the excuses which would impede evangelization. The most insidious of these excuses are certainly the ones which people claim to find support for in such and such a teaching of the Council.

Thus one too frequently hears it said, in various terms, that to impose a truth, be it that of the Gospel, or to impose a way, be it that of salvation, cannot but be a violation of religious liberty. Besides, it is added, why proclaim the Gospel when the whole world is saved by uprightness of heart? We know likewise that the world and history are filled with “seeds of the Word”; is it not therefore an illusion to claim to bring the Gospel where it already exists in the seeds that the Lord Himself has sown?

I think people misunderstand the means of presenting the Gospel. They might assume that because they are good teachers, then teaching is essential in all their evangelical efforts. It is not. Suppose a person, even a bishop, can only teach and do it well. If a situation calls for the cultivation of trust and the seeker is disinclined to be taught, then the teacher needs to be silent, and permit other gifts to be utilized. One of the Church’s biggest self-obstacles is a dogmatic approach to gifts. If a gift worked in one instance, it will work in all or many.

Anyone who takes the trouble to study in the Council’s documents the questions upon which these excuses draw too superficially will find quite a different view.

So what do we do? We simply provide ourselves as a living example.

It would certainly be an error to impose something on the consciences of our brethren. But to propose to their consciences the truth of the Gospel and salvation in Jesus Christ, with complete clarity and with a total respect for the free options which it presents- “without coercion, or dishonorable or unworthy pressure”[Dignitaties Humanae 4]- far from being an attack on religious liberty is fully to respect that liberty, which is offered the choice of a way that even non-believers consider noble and uplifting. Is it then a crime against others’ freedom to proclaim with joy a Good News which one has come to know through the Lord’s mercy?[Dignitaties Humanae, 9-14] And why should only falsehood and error, debasement and pornography have the right to be put before people and often unfortunately imposed on them by the destructive propaganda of the mass media, by the tolerance of legislation, the timidity of the good and the impudence of the wicked? The respectful presentation of Christ and His kingdom is more than the evangelizer’s right; it is (a) duty. It is likewise the right of (our) fellow (human beings) to receive from (believers) the proclamation of the Good News of salvation. God can accomplish this salvation in whomsoever He wishes by ways which He alone knows.[Ad Gentes 7] And yet, if His Son came, it was precisely in order to reveal to us, by His word and by His life, the ordinary paths of salvation. And He has commanded us to transmit this revelation to others with His own authority. It would be useful if every Christian and every evangelizer were to pray about the following thought: (people) can gain salvation also in other ways, by God’s mercy, even though we do not preach the Gospel to them; but as for us, can we gain salvation if through negligence or fear or shame- what St. Paul called “blushing for the Gospel”[Cf. Rom 1:16] – or as a result of false ideas we fail to preach it? For that would be to betray the call of God, who wishes the seed to bear fruit through the voice of the ministers of the Gospel; and it will depend on us whether this grows into trees and produces its full fruit.

Let us therefore preserve our fervor of spirit. Let us preserve the delightful and comforting joy of evangelizing, even when it is in tears that we must sow. May it mean for us- as it did for John the Baptist, for Peter and Paul, for the other apostles and for a multitude of splendid evangelizers all through the Church’s history- an interior enthusiasm that nobody and nothing can quench. May it be the great joy of our consecrated lives. And may the world of our time, which is searching, sometimes with anguish, sometimes with hope, be enabled to receive the Good News not from evangelizers who are dejected, discouraged, impatient or anxious, but from ministers of the Gospel whose lives glow with fervor, who have first received the joy of Christ, and who are willing to risk their lives so that the kingdom may be proclaimed and the Church established in the midst of the world.

I think if we asked different people: pope, bishops, clergy, religious, lay ministers, parishioners, neophytes–we would find many different answers to the question of what obstacles we ourselves place in the way of the Gospel. Pope Paul’s input here is worthy of consideration. But it is not the whole picture. And it is not the reality everywhere in local circumstances.

Your thoughts?

What lessons to be drawn from this?

USCCB votes 203-14 to move on to the Liturgy of the Hours.

Bishop Brom of San Diego:

I’m hearing from the priests … that we not rush headlong into further translations and using the Roman Missal that we have now in its English version as the basis …

Bishop Matano of Burlington, Vermont:

I do think it is a bit counter-productive to go back in time and give a critique of the new Roman Missal.

USCCB votes 189-41 to move on to the Liturgy of the Hours.

Granted, there were speeches behind these comments, but let’s ponder some possibilities:

The bishops don’t care what their priests think, so what possibly could make anyone believe they are listening to lay people?

The bishops are tired talking about liturgy. They just want the MC to turn the page and point.

Twenty-seven bishops seemed to have changed their minds after the California intervention. But three bishops woke up and voted the second time who didn’t cast a ballot the first.

Is the curia thinking, “Thank goodness we have those Americans under our thumb. Now, what the bleep are we going to do with the Germans?”

Where does Father John “Slavish” Z fit in the notion that once a translation is complete, complaining about it “only opens the door to … disunity.”? I suppose it depend on if the Culture of Complaint is in its ascendancy or not.

PS: Nice work guys, on the economy. Four years into a depression and you can’t agree on a word of faith and hope. Do us a favor and don’t bother sending one out next time.

The Grinch has hit our parish. A Christmas return from fire damage and repair was always up in the air anyway. We don’t have the final timeline with the subcontractors yet, but we’ve been told a March return is more likely than December. We can handle about two-hundred-plus in our lower lounge–nowhere near what we would draw in families at 4:45 on the 24th of December.

Above the nave is bedecked with scaffolding ten feet under the ceiling. Black plastic encloses the south balcony where asbestos abatement is proceeding. Workers are hard at it on weekdays. But its disheartening to see a place of worship empty of pews, instruments, and the spiritual life of people.

Coverage of the Fall USCCB Meeting, Day 1.

Archbishops Dolan and Vigano counseled contrition and holiness.

Channeling his inner Chesterton, the Jovial One asked what’s wrong with the world, and answered:

I am.

The Vatican’s ambassador to the US:

We must continually undergo conversion ourselves, so that our people … will have a renewed trust and confidence in us who are the messengers of the gospel. We must continually beg God to forgive those who out of human weakness have caused great pain to others.

Deal Hudson counseled dialing up the shouting:

Lay Catholics need to have a showdown with their bishops over exactly what they (the bishops) can say in an election cycle because they are not saying enough. This kind of nonsense has to stop.

Speaking of nonsense, I read that the LCWR and bishops had a meeting Sunday. A basic statement was issued:

The three bishop delegates of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), Archbishop J. Peter Sartain, Bishop Leonard P. Blair, and Bishop Thomas John Paprocki; the presidency of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR), Sister Florence Deacon, OSF; Sister Pat Farrell, OSF; and Sister Carol Zinn, SSJ; and LCWR executive director, Sister Janet Mock, CSJ, met Sunday, November 11, for preliminary discussions about the doctrinal assessment of LCWR by the CDF.

The discussion was open and cordial and those present agreed to meet again to continue the conversation.

Sr Pat Farrell will be coming to my parish for an event next semester.

Other bishops met bloggers and talked about relevant stuff. Anchorage Archbishop Roger Schwietz on blogging and such:

This is personality driven. What I’m used to is to focus on the message and stay out of the way.

Speaking on racist Catholics, a whisper from the loggia:

We have a major problem when people in our church think they can get away with that and be in communion with the Catholic Church.

Is this one of those gatherings that gets all-day coverage on EWTN? What else are you readers seeing?

The bishops make a distinction between liturgical and devotional art. Do you agree? Can art be both?

§ 155 § In order to create art that truly serves the liturgy, the artist must have an understanding of and reverence for the liturgy. There is both a distinction and a connection between devotional art and that designed for public liturgy. Liturgical arts are integrally related to the sacraments of the Church while devotional arts are designed to enrich the spiritual life of the community and the personal piety of its members. As the devotions of the Church are derived from the liturgy and lead to it,(SC 13) so devotional art must be in harmony with the liturgy, respect its nature, and draw people to its celebration. “The primary norm is that sacred art be functional, that is, the felicitous expression of what the liturgy is meant to be, the worship of God and the language of the  community at prayer.”(Pope Paul VI, Address to participants in a national congress of diocesan liturgical commissions of Italy (January 4, 1967) (DOL 539, no. 4319))Parishes will want both liturgical and devotional art.

Functional? Is this the proper description? Does art “function” by expressing liturgy, worship, and prayer? I agree that good sacred art should facilitate the spiritual and liturgical life of the Church. The word “function” makes me nervous. Too pragmatic. Not all art is result-oriented.

The Blessed Mother features prominently among the subjects of sacred art:

§ 156 § Prominent among Christian devotions is piety directed to Mary, the Mother of God. Since the earliest days of the Church God’s people have grown in their love of Mary as their mother, given to them by Jesus on the cross. Venerated and loved, invoked and imitated, she is a model for Christian faith, a support and refuge in time of need, and an eschatological image of what the Church hopes to become.(Lumen Gentium 66) Although this devotion differs essentially from the prayer of adoration directed to Christ, to the Spirit, and to the Father, it is one that is deeply imbedded in the hearts of Catholics.

§ 157 § The special and unique dignity of the Mother of God has been expressed in the devotional art of the Church. Artists have painted her image in wondrously meditative fashion as a “sign of sure hope and solace for the pilgrim People of God.”(Lumen Gentium 68) At the same time, veneration of Mary, like that of all other devotions, leads clearly to the worship of her Son. The location, style, and importance of Marian images in the church demonstrate the intimate connection she has with the eucharistic liturgy of Christ, as well as its distinctions.

How to judge when Marian devotion does not lead to Christ? Must it always be so?

All texts from Built of Living Stones are copyright © 2000, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, Inc. All rights reserved. Used with permission.

A video segment from dress rehearsal last year. “Raphael Binds the Demon” plus “Marriage Prayer.”

TOBIAH

Blessed are you. God of our ancestors, blessed forever is your holy name.
Let the heavens praise you, and all your creation for evermore.

SARAH

The Lord our God told Adam it is not good to be alone; a partner I will make for you.

TOBIAH

So Eve was made from Adam’s side to be his help and support.
And as it was for them, so it is for us tonight.

SARAH (with TOBIAH)

Blessed are you. God of our ancestors, blessed forever is your holy name.
Let the heavens praise you, and all your creation for evermore.

TOBIAH

I do not take my beloved for lust or for possession: I take her in singleness of heart.

SARAH

This one, O God, at long last, is bones of my bones and flesh of my flesh.

TOBIAH (with SARAH)

Blessed are you. God of our ancestors, blessed forever is your holy name.
Let the heavens praise you, and all your creation for evermore.

So a man must leave his parents

SARAH

and cling to his wife

TOBIAH & SARAH

And so we two become one body.
Send down your mercy on us and allow us to live together to a happy old age, Amen, Amen.

SARAH (with TOBIAH)

Blessed are you. God of our ancestors, blessed forever is your holy name.
Let the heavens praise you, and all your creation for evermore. Amen.

I meant to blog about this the other week, but consider yourselves forewarned for next year’s November 1 observance.

The solemn blessing for All Saints was so bad that the priest who used it for the vigil Mass on Wednesday night didn’t repeat it at either of the holy day liturgies here. When I first heard it I thought it was horrific, if not heretical. As I read it this morning, it’s not quite so bad. But you have to think about it. At which point in the Mass, you’re probably in the parking lot and on the way out anyway.

May God, the glory and joy of the Saints,
who has caused you to be strengthened
by means of their outstanding prayers,
bless you with unending blessings.

Freed through their intercession from present ills
and formed by the example of their holy way of life,
may you be ever devoted to serving God and your neighbor.

So that, together with all,
you may possess the joys of the homeland,
where Holy Church rejoices
that her children are admitted in perpetual peace
to the company of the citizens of heaven.

When I pray these prayers, I bow as requested, and since these solemn blessings used to be among my favorites (even though the cadence for “Amen” is handled with near universal awkwardness) I pay particular attention. So with the first invocation, I was distracted by being blessed with blessings. That may well be in the Latin original, but it reads like a middle school essay, stretched out to fill the word count.

Then I heard what sounds like unabashed pelagianism. In print, you might see after a moment of examination that it is the people who are freed from present ills through the intercession of the saints. I’d feel better attributing it directly to the grace of God, but at least it’s better than what I thought on first hearing, a clause describing the saints themselves. Again, the Latin original may not have “saints,” but it needs to be added for what amounts to a new paragraph. Basic English grammar. Necessary, because of the easy theological misinterpretation.

If “homeland” is not capitalized, I would presume it means an earthly country. Still, for the spoken invocation, it needs an adjective at minimum to indicate we are talking about heaven. On the other hand, if we can be blessed with blessings in the first invocation, I don’t see the problem with possessing the joys of heaven with the citizens of heaven.

Granted, the priest who rendered this tends to be less measured in his recitation of prayers. And holy days tend to be after thoughts inpreparation. Anybody else catch a stumble on this prayer? If it was even used?