For What Did Christ Die?

As many of my regular readers know, one neo-trad site that I find worthwhile is New Liturgical Movement.  While those contributors whose focus is on the philosophical merits of restoring the pre-conciliar rites are generally not worth the time, there are frequent articles on historical points that give interesting insights into the history and development of our Catholic, indeed our Christian, faith.  In our storehouse of Catholicism’s two millennia of treasures there are more than some old gilt chairs that broke under the weight of the fat arse of some doddering prelate.  We have Chartres and the In Paradisum and blue as a liturgical color.  (In fact we have yellow as a liturgical color which is really a bit outré.)  We have Mozart’s Ave Verum Corpus and the Canon of Addai and Mara, and the Easter Sepulcher and the hymns of the Roman Breviary.   Some, many, of the old things are probably best left in the storeroom, but some really need to be taken out a bit more often and polished-up and used.  But in doing so we always need to ask ourselves: What is the Church for which Jesus gave his life? 

There was a great video of the coronation of Pius XII (March 12, 1939) on the site.  It led me to a host of other old videos of the old days of prelates clad in silks and furs like Hollywood starlets or the San Francisco Gay Pride parade. (C’mon boys, even Cardinal Burke says that men should dress like men. Not that he practices what he preaches.) It is a reminder that to work on reinforcing our liturgy with elements both old and new is the work of wise stewards, but to build kingdoms other than the Kingdom of God is to make a mockery of the Cross.  

Reason 7 Why the New Mass beats our the Old Rite

Fiat Lux: CardinalBurke chooses
to remain in the dark.   

I admit that one of my serious flaws is that I am a bit ADHD.  I never focus.  I am all over the lot with the things I do and the interests I have.  And it gets reflected in this blog as the various series I start take f-o-r-e-v-e-r to finish.  That Anglican history thing has been running for God-alone-knows-how-long now—and we are just at the Oxford Movement.  Of course part of that is that it does take a lot more research than other topics on which I write.  And I can easily get lost in the detail—but again that is a sign of my attention issues.  And the series on why the revised rites of Vatican II are superior to the pre-conciliar rites—a response to the ever-supercilious Professor Peter Kwasniewski of Wyoming Catholic College, that Notre Dame of the western prairies who wrote a remarkably shallow posting arguing the contrary position on Rorate Caeli.  I really need to focus on over the next couple of weeks tie up this series. 

I watched Pope Francis celebrated the Mass During the Night (once known as Midnight Mass) at Saint Peter’s Basilica this last Thursday evening.  (I watched it on television, of course, though I have often been at the Christmas Mass in person, even having a seat in the capella papale due to the generosity of a friend of mine who is a senior prelate in that world the other side of the Roman looking glass but who, “to preserve my (his) sanity wouldn’t be caught dead at one of those curial drag shows.”)   And I went to Christmas morning Mass at my parish.  I can’t believe that anyone would prefer the usus antiquior over the contemporary rite.  Both the papal Mass on television and our parish Mass were spectacular.  They were reverent.  The music was exquisite.  They were intelligible—both in regard to vernacular language (well, ok, the pope said the prayers of the Mass in Latin—which is a vernacular to me so I sometimes don’t notice—but the readings were in the language(s) of the assembly as were the prayers of the faithful.  Oh, yes, that is another difference in the rites—the novus ordo has the prayers of the Church.)  The music in our parish—led by a cantor but also helped out by a six-voice schola cantorum included both the old (traditional Christmas carols in both Latin and English) and the new (including a lovely piece by John Rutter called “Mary’s Lullaby.”)  What the parish Mass created was a sense of bonding among the worshippers that led people not to rush home but to stay around the church and chat over cocoa and Christmas cookies for over an hour.  It was the sort of environment that makes one want to come to Church. 

Well, enough about that.  Let’s get to reason number 7 in our list. 

The Liturgy introduces us to the life of discipleship as we follow the saints through the Church year. 

In the pre-conciliar rites there were plenty of Saints’ days.  In fact we had more saints than days, leading to pile-ups of collects at the beginning of each Mass as prior to the 1962 Missal revision, each collect had to be said in a sort of string of prayers at the beginning of each Mass.  There could be as many as seven collects said on an ordinary day.  I don’t want to say that there is any such thing as too many saints but frankly before Vatican II there were too many saints commemorated in the Liturgy.  Even Lent and Advent were overrun with saints confusing the focus of the liturgy and diverting from the temporal cycle.  The revised calendar trimmed back the number of saints commemorated in the Liturgy, leaving some saints of dubious provenance without a feast day.

Beginning back as far as the pontificate of Pius XII, so beloved of the traditionalists, there were attempts to scale back the Roman Calendar of Saints.  There was also from the time of Pius forward an increase of canonizations of more contemporary saints who were not just names or the subjects of somewhat outlandish hagiography but who could serve as real models for people in today’s world.  More and more saints were named from among the laity (though still not a proportionate number to the laity in the Church.)  The recently canonized Zelie and Louis Martin, a married couple (and parents of Saint Thérèse of Lisieux), are one example of recent saints.  Pier Giorgio Frassati, Gianna Molla, are other examples.  Among the religious you have Saint Marianne Cope, an American (though German-born) Franciscan Sister who worked alongside Father Damien at Molokai.  Pino Puglisi was an Italian priest murdered in 1993 for his opposition to the Mafia.  Jerzy Popieluszko was a Polish priest murdered by the Marxist government of that country for leading the Solidarity resistance.  Katherine Drexel was a wealthy American heiress who devoted her life and her fortune to educating Native American and African-American children. 

There are some interesting people in the “saint pipeline,” my favorite being Dorothy Day, an American social reformer and political radical whom Pope Francis mentioned in his address to Congress.  I am sure that is a boost to her cause.  Dorothy Day is a particularly important model because she had resorted to an abortion in her pre-Catholic youth.   Another person whose cause has not yet been formally introduced but who is being looked at is Monika Helwig, a German-born British citizen who was a leading American theologian.  Helwig had been a religious sister but with the encouragement of her superiors left religious life to pursue a theological education.  (The Constitutions of her religious congregation limited the work of the Sisters to Missionary and Medical work that precluded a theological education).  Helwig continued to live her vows as a lay woman and adopted three children and raised them as a single mother.  She was known not only for her theological prowess (she was chair of the Theology Department at Georgetown University) but for her charitable work and for her involvement in her parish.  As she died quite recently (2005), it is early for a formal process but her papers have all been carefully archived in anticipation and testimonies to her character have been collected. 

The calendar revisions which accompanied the 1970 reform of the Roman Rite retained the classic saints: the Apostles and other New Testament figures, the early Martyrs mentioned in the Roman canon, Martin, Patrick, Benedict as well as outstanding examples of faith or charity such as Thomas More, Vincent de Paul, the Curé of Ars and others.  It also made room for significant new saints such as the Korean Andrew Kim and companions, the Vietnamese Andrew Dung-Lac and companions, the Ugandan Charles Lwanga and companions, Edith Stein, Mary MacKillop and others.  The revised rite and calendar give us plenty of saints, including somewhat contemporary ones, from whose lives to draw the lessons of Christian faithfulness.  At the same time the calendar is structured to keep the focus of Advent and Lent on the mysteries of the Incarnation and Redemption.  Even such historically important figures as Patrick, Peter Damian, or Saint George get optional memorials, permitting but not requiring their feast to be celebrated. 

Thus there are plenty of saints including contemporaries but not so many that we lose sight of the story of Redemption that unfolds in the Temporal Cycle.  

By the way, one reader recently asked for the dates of the previous entries in this cycle.  The Professor in me is inclined to day: do your own damn research.  It isn't that hard with the label list on the right hand side of this page.  But I just happen to have the dates at hand, so here goes:

10 23 15

10 10 15

8   31  15

7   28  15

7   23  15

7   20  15

7   17  15

7   14  15

The Division Grows Deeper But Will It Divide?

John Joseph Myers, Archbishop
of Newark

Well the Synod goes on and the markers of division within the Church grow stronger and stronger as fear of change haunts the anti-Francis faction in the Church.  I posted on this past Monday about the letter sent to Pope Francis by Cardinal Pell and several (the exact number is disputed as it seems some Cardinal’s names were added without their knowledge) other Cardinals protesting that the Synod has been rigged to predetermine a more progressive agenda towards sacramental inclusion of those in “irregular” unions. 

Now it turns out that Newark New Jersey Archbishop John Joseph (aka “Farmer John” because of his southern Illinois roots) Myers of Newark sent a letter to his clergy insisting on the tightest of guidelines about who may and who may not receive Holy Communion.   Turns out that the priests and religious of the Archdiocese are as banned from the Lord’s Table as are the multiply married, the transgendered and the gay.  “His Grace,” as he likes to be known with all the affectations of an Anglican Primate waddling into the House of Lords, has declared that “Catholics must be in a marriage recognized as valid by the Church to receive Holy Communion or other sacraments.”  Well, golly gee.  That puts the Arch himself in a catch 22.   If he is married, it cannot be in a canonical marriage, as priests cannot validly marry.  And if he is not married—well he himself has declared that only those in a marriage the Church recognizes as valid can receive the Sacraments—he is not eligible for Holy Communion.  We have canon lawyers for a reason—you would think they would have checked his letter before it was sent out.  In fact you would think a good secretary would catch the blunder.  But at the end of the day there are more horses’ asses than horses.  No need to verify the obvious. 

But that is only part of the story.  “His Grace” of Newark is living beneath the shadow of his far more popular successor, the appointed coadjutor, Bernard Hebda, as the clergy and faithful count down the days to Myers’ 75^th.  Myers and Hebda provide  a sort of good cop/bad cop duo.  Hebda, at least in his public face, walks a more Francis line on things.  He lives more simply, living in a dorm at Seton Hall University.  He has better people skills and is more approachable.  Behind the scenes he is every bit the Institution Man that most bishops are, but if life is a Christmas pageant, he knows how to play the shepherd.  That alone gives him an edge over many of his colleagues who are still into the Prince of the Church model and can’t seem to shift.  In any event, Archbishop Hebda gave a good talk to the Religious of the Archdiocese yesterday where he offered a far more inclusive theology of Church than Myers’ terse veditum.   It wasn’t a direct assault on Myers’ position but it made it clear that there is a new sheriff waiting in the wings, one who sees the Church as more inclusive and welcoming to all.  In the event, most priests have said that they will take the Archbishop’s letter for what it is worth and that policies in the parishes will change little if at all.  The Archdiocese is in the middle of a 90 million dollar capital campaign and it will be interesting to see if Archbishop Myers’ letter causes much fallout.  

Myers is not the only bishop to express his concerns about where Francis is taking the Church.  Cardinal Burke has said that the Church under Francis is a ship without a rudder.  Bishop Tobin of Providence has criticized Pope Francis.  Archbishop Chaput who just two weeks ago welcomed the Pope to Philadelphia has spoken up about the “anxiety” that Francis’ Synod on the Family is causing among those determined to resist any change in pastoral practice.  Several other bishops—Cordileone of San Francisco, Loverde of Arlington, Lori of Baltimore, Paprocki of Springfield, Lennon of Cleveland, Sheridan of Colorado Springs, Slattery of Tulsa, Olmstead of Phoenix, have all been quoted from private conversations—often after a drink too many—with disparaging remarks about Pope Francis or the direction in which he is taking the Church.  I am sure they are not the only bishops who have let slip their dismay with the current occupant of Peter’s chair.

Clergy and laity are far more outspoken.  Despite the lovely welcoming ceremony at the seminary of Saint Charles in Philadelphia, the word is that the student body is overwhelmingly anti-Francis.  Even more rabid are the seminarians at Mount Saint Mary’s in Emmitsburg where Francis is widely regarded as a usurper on the Papal Throne.  And an acquaintance just back from the sabbatical program at the Pontifical North American College  (you know, you saw the video of the NAC *** Men’s Chorus and the toe-tapping clerics of Little Broadway) was shocked by the anti-Francis sentiments being expressed openly by “a vast majority” of the NACers.  Diocese of Arlington clergy regularly undermine the Pope and his desire for a more inclusive Church from the pulpits of Saint John the Beloved in McLean, Saint John the Apostle in Leesburg, Saint John the Evangelist in Warrenton, Saint John the Baptist in Front Royal, and several other parishes where the priests are determined to hold the line against any loosening up of Church discipline.  Arlington, while particularly infested with clergy who are anti-Francis is far from the only diocese that is suffering from a split Catholicism.  Examples can also be found in New York, Philadelphia, and Boston.  And of course, our friends such as the Canons of Saint John Cantius in Chicago and the Canons Regular of the New Jerusalem in Wheeling and in Saint Louis as well as the Institute of Christ the King Sovereign Priest run churches that are bubbles of a bygone Catholicism and while they are devout in prayers for the Holy Father, otherwise barely acknowledge his existence much less his vision for the Church in our contemporary world. 

And then we have the blogging priests.  “Father Z,” who in between gorging himself with culinary delights and squeezing into over-sized airline seats manages to blog consistently against Francis and his policies, is sort of the Dean of the Anti-Francis blogs.  More vicious but less well known is the English Father Hunwicke, a refugee from the Church of England who would like to make us all over in his image and likeness of what the Catholic Church should be, as if the soured Anglican would know authentic Catholicism.  And of course there is Rene Henry Gracida, the retired bishop of Corpus Christi and his blog, Abyssus Abyssum Invocat which might be better translated the Abysmal Calls to the Abysmal.  Honest to goodness, the man was a poor enough excuse for a bishop, as a blogger he just fills the world with a gloomy faux gospel of judgment and condemnation.  Father Joseph Illo, aka Father Riceroni, the San Francisco treat, makes sure everyone is on board with his scribe and Pharisee Catholicism in contradistinction to Francis’ message of Mercy.  And then there is The Black Biretta: A Cleric Opines.  Sorry Father, but stop opining and get to work preaching the Gospel, the Good News of salvation not the sour news of condemnation.  You weren’t ordained to opine and you obviously weren’t give the charism by the Holy Spirit to have anything worthwhile to say. 

I won’t even go into the Lay Bloggers save to say that Michael Hichborn of Lepanto Institute is in virtual schism in what he says about Pope Francis and the Synod of Bishops.  Rorate Caeli, at one time a worthwhile blog despite its right-wing biases, has lost any credibility for sound theological thinking or for loyalty to the Church and has just morphed into a rant.  As for the witches of Eastwick, Janet and Carole and Mary Ann and the other koven of krazies are beside themselves in despair and ready to jump ship from Peter’s barque should compassion and reconciliation triumph over self-righteousness and spiritual pride.  Let ‘em go, let them all go. 

In the end it will be, I think, much ado about nothing because while many priests and the wing-nut laity will let spiritual pride win out and convince them that they know Catholicism better than the Pope, ultimately I don’t think a single bishop will go with them. You can’t have a schism without a bishop.   In the end Myers and Sheridan and Olmstead and Lori and Burke—and even that old senile windbag Gracida—won’t walk Peter’s plank.  Frankly I might have more respect for them if they did.  I can deal with stupidity, but it shakes me to see people who lack moral courage to stand by their convictions.  Old hens all, I am afraid, who squawk and pick and ruffle their feathers but nothing more.