Friday, February 12, 2016

ALTHOUGH HIS EMINENCE DOESN'T POINT OUT THE OBVIOUS WITH THE DIVINE LITURGY, THE MISSAL, HE AGREES WITH ME THAT WE NEED A REFORMED ORDINARY FORM OF THE MASS WITH EXTRAORDINARY FORM ENRICHMENTS!

At the Deus Ex Machina Blog there is a video of a presentation given by Cardinal Raymond Burke with questions and answers. These are the two most important questions and answers from His Eminence:

Priest: How does His Eminence see the role of the Tridentine liturgy in the normal, day to day life of the typical parish in Poland and elsewhere.

Answer: The best term that describes the existence of two forms of the Roman rite is the “mutual enrichment”about which speaks the papal document. There is no doubt about the fact that the post conciliar liturgical reform was very “firm” and “abrupt” and at times too overbearing. Today, there must be found a way under a co-existence of the two forms, that the two rites not be seen as opposites, but rather to strive to coexist and create the mutually enriching environment.

Cleric: What is the current status of the project of the hermeneutic of continuity in the Church. What kind of support does it have among the princes of the Church and does it have any future.

Answer: I am convinced that the form of the liturgy according to the hermeneutic of continuity is in fact alive and truly vital. I will allow myself to refer to an article published by Cardinal Sarah, Robert Sarah Prefect of the Congregation of Divine Worship , in an article that was published on the 12th of June of last year, in which the Cardinal expressly claims that he is, with his entire heart behind the reform in accordance with the hermeneutic of continuity and he will try to everything possible to continue the work started by Pope Benedict XVI. therefore, courage.

My Comment: The last sentence by Cardinal Burke sums it up--I've been right all along!

27 comments:

gob said...

Anybody who would wear an outfit like this is, in my opinion, a phony, weird doofus. He make being a Catholic embarrassing.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

You must really hate what Patriarch Lirill wears ceremonially as well as his headdress in meeting the Holy Father. I think you are moderncentric oof the narrow minded type.

gob said...

I think costumes are fine for the theater. An actor is pretending to be something that he or she is not. I don't see the point for "holier than thou" outfits. I am W A Y less "narrow minded" than you are. BTW, what does "oof" mean?

Flavius Hesychius said...

Oh, don't be too harsh, Father M. Gob gets... aroused over hats and capes. The fantasies overwhelm him.

Without his klobuk, the Patriarch is in the habit of a monk. Which is kind of funny, to think he's a monk.

Flavius Hesychius said...

I posted that in the wrong thread. But my comments still stand.

Vox Cantoris said...

When Francis devolves the Catholic Church into national churches and undertakes the now revealed attack on the Congregation of Divine Worship giving authority for liturgy over to Bishops Conferences, how will we see any stability in the liturgy or any of these good things?

We are headed for disaster and it is there for all to see.

Sorry Father, I wish I could be more positive, but I am hopeful.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Pope Francis named Cardinal Sarah the prefect of this congregation. If Pope Francis wants the Catholic Church to be more like the Orthodox Church, which is highly decentralized, I would hope our own form of "synodality" and subsidiarity would be modeled on theirs but without nationalism.

The Orthodox seem to have maintained unity in two key areas: Doctrine and Liturgy. Their liturgy doesn't seem to be tinkered with on the national level although different languages are used. I am not sure what "inculturation" would look like in Orthodoxy, but they have spread too across the globe and into Africa.

The joint agreement yesterday by the pope and patriarch was very tradition on family values and life. This is hopeful I think.

Gene said...

What we need is an extra-special, semi-automatic, double-clutch in E Flat reform of the reformed reform of the Extraordinary Ordinary reformed Ordinary form with an adjustment to the already adjusted adjustment and a side of fries.

Gene said...

Calling the garments "holier than thou" is a sure sign of your intractable and pitiful ignorance.

John Nolan said...

By dressing as a cardinal, Burke is not 'pretending to be something that he is not', since he actually is a cardinal (or has this escaped Gobshite's notice?)

'Holier than thou' outfits presumably apply to liturgical dress, so Gob might tell us what is the appropriate liturgical costume for a priest. A lounge suit? A boiler suit?

The cappa magna is ceremonial, not liturgical dress. A cardinal is a prince of the Church, just as a bishop in his diocese must be prince and pastor. But in a pontifical Mass after the entrance procession the bishop is divested of the cappa (sic transit gloria mundi) and assumes the vestments of a subdeacon, deacon and priest.

Even Americans don't totally despise ceremonial dress. The Knights of Columbus wear a bicorn hat which in Britain was part of the now more-or-less obsolete Court Dress. General Officers of the Household Division wear them but only in full dress on rare ceremonial occasions.

Dialogue said...

With some discomfort, I admit that I agree with gob a little about the attire of the cardinal.

As far as Cardinal Burke's sentiments are concerned, I think he sees what the rest of us see by now, that the long hoped for return to liturgical reverence in the Roman liturgical tradition is a fading dream. Maybe he doesn't wish to admit it, but he's clever enough to know the truth.

Pope Benedict could have taken concrete step to reintroduce reverence, and I'll never understand why John Paul II failed to see the connection between liturgical irreverence and false doctrine, but that's just how it is. The matter is settled for many years to come.

Gene said...

Dialogue, He may be wearing that attire to make a point that needs to be made. He may also be wearing it to embody a reverence for the sovereignty of God as a representative of Christ on earth....the Christ who now sits in Glory and will come again in Glory to judge the living and the dead. Today's Church seems only to be acquainted with the humanity of Christ, almost embarrassed by his Divinity and majesty, worshipping the Cross instead of the Trinity.

John Nolan said...

Dialogue,

I don't have many years left, but despite having been brought up before V2 and having lived through the liturgical revolution as a teenager, I have never tolerated liturgical irreverence. In the 1970s this meant finding somewhere that would celebrate the NO properly; Brompton Oratory was an exemplar but was by no means alone even in those dark years. Indeed, since access to the Usus Antiquior was very restricted, the chances of finding a NO Latin Mass was greater than it is today.

The upside is the increasing availability of the Roman Rite; I've been studying and singing the Chant for ten years now, and singers are very much in demand. I'd like to do Chant (including vernacular Chant) in average parishes but they're stuck in the rut of the four-hymn sandwich and the belief that all you need for liturgical music is a guitar.

I don't expect dramatic changes and the damage done by Vatican II will take centuries to put right. I do sometimes ask myself that if I had been born a century earlier I might have taken everything for granted and perhaps experiencing a revolution sharpens the mind and makes for a better counter-revolutionary. It certainly makes one more liturgically aware.

TJM said...

gobby just confirmed he is a lib: judgemental, totalitarian, and a dim bulb

Anonymous said...

"Dressing as a Cardinal."

The costume is that of a temporal ruler, not a servant of the Gospel. That is came to be the "jurisdictional" dress of a Cardinal is an historical reality, but one that has long since lost any real meaning. And that is a good thing.

Ermine, banned except for the Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, was a sign of wealth and power. Watered silk, train bearers, 15 meter (49 feet), shortened to 7 meters (23 feet), these are elements of medieval potentatery, not Gospel-based evangelization.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Pope Francis continues to use watered silk for his cassock's sash and sleeves.

I think many missed the point of the monarchical look or as you put it the medieval potentatery, a term I like by the way. It was to emphasize the Divinity of the Risen and Glorified Christ reigning gloriously in the Kingdom of Heaven our true home.

If I was dirt poor, which I am not, I think I would not resent popes, bishops and priests and our churches from pointing me away from my dismal earthly life to the splendor of heaven where I will be rich because Jesus is there. That is the Gospel.

The Low Church stuff and the Low Christology stuff is just plain banal and ugly. Poverty for the sake of poverty and banality for the sake of banality is for the dictators the likes of the Castros.

Don't get me wrong. I don't like the Cappa Magna, feel uncomfortable when I see bishops wearing it and the ermine is a bit of a turn off too. In our so-called macho culture, it also points to the feminine or perhaps the gay. And thus there is a homophobic element to those who disparage its use I think.

Dialogue said...

Father McDonald,

In my case, I admit that the societal shift towards unnatural marriage, along with the related effeminate clerical subculture, has rendered it especially difficult for me to appreciate the "lace and tassel" elements of traditional clerical dress.

Anonymous said...

Medieval potentatery was used to ape medieval potentates. The same is true of cardinalatial palaces, seats of honor at banquets, titles of respect.

Our heavenly home has nothing to do with temporal finery. There is nothing in the Gospel that says otherwise. In heaven, these things that matter, that make individuals look important, on earth will be gone.

If I were dirt poor I would resent like heck some spiffily dressed cleric of any rank "pointing me away from my dismal earthly life" while he dressed in the best, dined on elegant foods prepared by chefs, or rode around in expensive automobiles, while doing nothing to help me better my earthly existence.

And if earthly finery is such a wonderful thing, why have you taken Patriarch Kiril to task over his expensive watch. Surely this helps those who are dirt poor to think of heavenly splendor.....

Dialogue said...

"I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne high and elevated: and his train filled the temple."

Gene said...

No Cardinal or Priest today wears finery because they think they are royalty or power brokers. The intention is to reflect the majesty of God, just as fine Churches and Basilicas are built with splendor to foreshadow the Kingdom of Heaven. There is nothing wrong with this, indeed, the poor of many countries flock to these places with awe and humility. The "dirt poor," as you describe them, deserve beautiful and awe inspiring places in which to worship. Many of these poor countries are proud to have these fine Churches among them. But, maybe you should find some falling down shack in which to worship. You could wear some tattered jeans and an Allman Bros. sweatshirt with Ripple stains on it and suck on a bong while stuttering through an Ave or two. Oh, don't forget to give all you own to the poor.

Dialogue said...

God made the Temple High Priest dress in peculiar array. Was God wrong to do so? Did He make the High Priest look like a "phony, weird doofus"? We need to answer "no", but the peculiarity remains. God hanging dead on a cross is also a peculiar image, and some would call it phony and weird, and call a follower of such a god a "doofus".

Anonymous said...

God did not make Cardinals dress in a particular way, as He did do for Temple priests. God wears the train in heaven, no one else.

"Dirt poor" was used By Fr. MacDonald - I used it following his lead.

Many of those awe-inspiring churches, especially in former European colonial countries, were built with slave labor and with precious gems, gold, and silver, stolen from the indigenous populations.

George said...


Anonymous:

The construction of the Cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris was begun in 1163 and completed in 1345. Many who worked on it never saw it to its completion. The cathedral it replaced,(Saint-√Čtienne), which had been founded in the 4th century, was itself quite massive with five aisles in its nave. I have not read anything about it, nor about similar structures being constructed with "slave labor and with precious gems, gold, and silver, stolen from the indigenous populations." If you are referring to Churches built in the European colonies, can you cite some specific examples? It is true that much of the work was done on European Cathedrals and churches was by those on the lower level of the economic strata (as it is today-although those who are members of unions fare much better as far as wages and benefits go).

Gene said...

Anonymous, you are such a pitiful, guilty lib. Half the clothes you wear, the food you eat, and the shoes on your feet are produced by slave labor. The nations your president supports and funds practice slavery, systematized rape, religious persecution and murder (on TV), and degrade women (just like your popular Leftist TV shows here). While you and your ilk whine about global warming and pollution, condemning well-regulated industry in this country, your beloved Third World countries destroy forests, pollute the oceans, and wipe out wildlife populations for fun and sport while you say nothing about that. Oh, and those gems, gold and silver were not "stolen"...they were mined by advanced nations with the tools and know how to extract them and use them for a greater good instead of making trinkets out of them for their savage women and kids to wear or trading them for women and children slaves. Welcome to cultural evolution and, yes, manifest destiny. That really makes you ate your pants, doesn't it...LOL!

Dialogue said...

Anonymous, the Temple was in Jerusalem.

Gene said...

My post above should have read "That really makes you (Anonymous) WET your pants..." not ate your pants. Spell checker...But, it may also make him eat his pants, whatever.

Jan said...

Dialogue and Gob, one of the things that the Capa Magna that Cardinal Burke is wearing represents is the blood of the martyrs, and I cannot think of a more a more appropriate time with the beheading of so many Christian martyrs in recent years. Also when a Pope or Cardinal wears red it apparently it symbolises their willingness to die for the Church. I read where Pope Francis said that he feared to die a violent death - maybe that is why he chooses not to wear the red of the martyrs? If you search on the web you will readily see photos of Cardinal Pell and others wearing the Capa Magna, so it's not just Cardinal Burke who is demonstrating his willingness to be a martyr and he has indeed suffered a dry martyrdom so far. Comments like Gob's add to that but wouldn't phase such a good and faithful servant as Cardinal Burke. Deo gratias for him, a gift to the Church!