Thursday, June 24, 2010


I'm not opposed to bishops and cardinals wearing the cappa magna when it is prescribed by the liturgical books of 1962. Unfortunately when these were made optional but never suppressed in 1969, the bishop or cardinal who chose the option surely looked foolish and made himself an object of scorn and ridicule. It was his own peculiar oddity since it wasn't mandated. Just like the priest who insists that his chasuble be lifted at the elevation in the OF--it's not prescribed, although I don't think altogether suppressed. But in the EF it is not dependent upon is like or dislike, it is prescribed thus saving him from ridicule and the dictatorship of personal preferences.

So I have some photos for you. Which ones of these should cause the most ridicule and scorn to the Church? The ones in the liturgical books or the made up ones that have no basis in the liturgical books?

Just think what the passerby on the street thinks of Catholics. They're wondering what the heck do they do in the Church. Wait until they see the dancers!

Now this is down right shocking and such a throw back to the Renaissance! Liturgical dancers in skimpy attire is so much more Christ-like in the simplicity of it all!

This liturgical oddity is so meaningful and beautiful:

Now this is so much better than the cappa magna and surely will not elicit mockery from others who don't understand this beautiful liturgical custom and ministry

Now this dancing Jesuit, I kid you not, needs a cappa magna or a toppa magna and quick!

Vestal virgins around the pope!


Seeker said...

ROFLOL!!!! Thanks I needed that and a picture is worth 1000 words.

The Pinoy Catholic said...

Great point Father Allan! Surely most of the liturgical oddities in the later part of the post do not even lift the spirits to prayer and contemplation nor does it give the sense of the sacred in our worship of the Triune God!

Great post! With your permission, I will link this to my blog

Frajm said...

To pinoy Catholic, thanks and link on!

Mackja said...

For some odd reason we have gotten confused. If we understand all beauty comes from God or is of God, and the understanding of philosophy means the seeking of greater or higher knowledge, and true art is the expression of something greater than self, then the many elements of the pre Vatican II church make total sense.
When man forgets what and where beauty comes from, forgets what the true meaning of philosophy is, and what true art is, then we get lost. From being a culture that looked outward to something greater than self, we have become a society that looks inward, only at self, personal self expression trumps all else. Some how many people want to imprint there thoughts and taste on the liturgy. What I see is on one hand is beauty, respect, reverence, sense of the sacred, and transcendence, a reaching out beyond self, on the other is self expression, a desire to do things my way, I know better, this is what I think Jesus would do. All one has to do is look at what is being thought as philosophy today, the stuff being called art. Today it looks inward so far inward that it becomes dark, and closed, and no longer express beauty in any way. If the liturgy is to be a glimpse of heaven, and scripture gives us beautiful imagery of what heaven is, then the liturgy must copy that imagery, that beauty of what awaits us in heaven. While Jesus was on earth, he was very humble and simple in dress, and where he lived, but when he ascended into heaven he and His environment changed, he was glorified, and is seated at the right hand of God in majesty, purity, in a beauty we cannot comprehend. The liturgy is to give us a foretaste of the beatific vision, the beauty of God in heaven, where perfection, incomprehensible love is..
The Church lives out both the human and divine aspects of our Lord. To express Christ earthly existence the Church lives out a life of poverty, chastity, and charity, in faith. To express Christ heavenly life the Church through the liturgy gives us hope, a look at what awaits us. If all I have to look forward to is hay bails, stone ware, bad dancers in silly costumes, and puppets, then I am not to excited about the after life. But on the other had if heaven is as scripture puts it, has streets paved in gold, and a beauty beyond human understanding, I am truly blessed and hope to be there with our Lord. All the talk of understanding the relationship between the divine and human by some you would think this would be obvious, but again some only see what they want to see.

Anonymous said...

Seriously, you need to get over the abuses that happened back in the 70s! For the most part, this stuff isn't going on anymore! Quit using these ridiculous, outdated photos to 'prove' your point and start using something with some actual substance.

Templar said...

Mackja hits a Home Run with that post.

As far as the abuses not happening anymore Anonymous, surely you jest. While these photos may or may not date from the 70s, I can assure you that I have witnessed Liturgical Dancing, and Readings being acted out by people and puppets VERY recently. There are at the moment in the US far more Heterodox than Orthodox Parishes

Anonymous said...

Pope John Paul II looks like he was towards the end of his reign which puts this photo somewhere in the late 90,s early 2000's so the photos are not all from the 70's..It still goes on, admit it or not..Just look on youtube where they are dated, you will find the same stuff with more current dating...

pinanv525 said...

That pic of John Paul and the girls is photo shopped.

Anonymous said...

Well, since we love to cite experiential facts, I've attended Mass in innumerable locations throughout the United States over the past 10 years. Here's how my 'facts' stack up:

Times Seen
Liturgical Dancers: 1
Questionable Eucharistic Elements: 0
Made-up Eucharistic Prayers: 2
Puppets: 0
Clowns: 0
Lack of chasuble/appropriate vesture: 0 (though stole outside of chausble is probably int he 20s)
Non-precious metal chalices: 6
Poor homiletics: 100+

Anonymous said...

You're supposed to be a priest. On your consecration, you gave yourself totally to Christ. You have the sacred power to bring God physically to the faithful during Mass. You have the sacred faculty to absolve sin in God's authority. You are a dispenser of the Sacraments!

Part of being a priest is the sacred task of defending what is sacred. How many Saints were martyred just because they defended what is sacred? How many Saints were martyred just because they were caught saying Mass for the faithful?

Then again, these things don't matter anymore, right? Today, the secular minds of many would be quick to judge the traditional-minded thinkers. Perhaps you care too much about what others may think about Catholics when they see a bishop wearing a splendorous Cappa Magna, or if they see priests wearing the Biretta? And you would condone to the abuses just so that you can 'fit in' with the crowd, who don't even give a damn about us, or our faith.

Think of the Saints! Think of their Sacrifice to keep what is Sacred and glorious to God. Yes, maybe dancing does give praise to God, but not during Mass! Not in the church please! The church is the house of the Eucharist, and should be kept that way. It is supposed to be an abode where the faithful can pray with utmost reverence without distractions or interruptions. (I can't even find sufficient reason to think that wearing togas give praise to God.)

Respect Liturgical law! Remember your vow of obedience to the ordinary? Who is of greater rank in the eyes of God? The ordinary? Or the Pope? Who promulgated these liturgical laws? Your ordinary? Or your Pope?

“The liturgy has its laws which must be respected.” — Pope John Paul II, March 8, 1997.

I'm only fourteen, Father. But I've seen already too many abuses that our church has taken, both internally and externally.

Be a good priest, Father, and please imitate Christ. I'm praying for you Father, and if someday, my vocation to the Priesthood will bear fruit, I will also say Mass for you.