Whether you question the prudence of Cardinal Burke or not, this is somewhat similar to the Archbishop Marcel Lefebrve case in the 1970's. It is history in the making, wouldn't you agree?
Saturday, March 25, 2017
THIS IS CHURCH HISTORY IN THE MAKING: MORE FROM CARDINAL BURKE ON THE FORMAL CORRECTION OF A SITTING PONTIFF
Whether you question the prudence of Cardinal Burke or not, this is somewhat similar to the Archbishop Marcel Lefebrve case in the 1970's. It is history in the making, wouldn't you agree?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
The arrogance of Burke (Yes. It is intentional on my part to address this disobedient person by his last name.)
He should shut his mouth and beg the forgiveness of the Holy Father.
Then retire to a Carthusian Monastery and do Penance.
His pride will be his downfall.
Anonymous,
I don't know of anybody in the Catholic Church today who shuts their mouth and begs forgiveness of the Holy Father. If you have not noticed, traditional discipline is not enforced today in the Catholic Church. And it is very ironic that you would invoke such traditional discipline against those in disagreement with a pope who is most against such disciplinary action. This is strange.
Pope Francis is not bothered by discussion and disagreement and even encouraged open resistance to him that is based on goodwill in his discussion to the Roman Curia last December. In fact, I think this pope would disagree with demands for silence, judgment of one's intentions, and calls for monastic enclosure by someone who hides behind Internet anonymity. While I have never been able to imitate Pope Francis' insults (nor really want to) I think he would refer to your comment as an outdated insecure form of medievalism that is unhealthy for Christians.
If Burke publicly rebukes the pope over a prudential matter, then that would be inappropriate. If, however, Pope Francis continues to indicate that an unrepentant adulterer can receive Holy Communion, then the cardinals need to speak out publicly against such nonsense.
On a side note, while I'm all for reverent liturgy, especially the Mass, I do think Burke needs to lay aside some of the sillier looking attire, even if it is prescribed in the EF rubrics.
"sillier looking attire?" I think that award has been won by progressive clerics long ago
I agree 100% with "Dialogue". While I have no problem with things like the Cappa, so much Catholicity has been destroyed that it (things like the cappa) would be more of a barrier to everyday Catholics . I think something that is more important and Traditional like kneeling for communion would be more helpful at this point.
Your ordinary Catholic in 2017 has no clue about the traditions of the Church or beautiful liturgy etc. I think they have to be actually taught and believe in the Catholic Faith before other things like the cappa are revived. Not that it is wrong to wear a cappa but people don't even believe in objective truth anymore. Things like upholding the faith, priests and nuns actually publicly speaking about the moral teachings of the Church and restoring practical things that fortify Catholic identity like meatless Friday's and women wearing chapel veils and abolishing communion in the hand and restoring some Latin are more important right now than lace and fine vestments. Just an opinion.
Yes, the cappa magna and ermine need to go and even alienated rank and file Catholics in Italy when these were the norm and my mother who was born in 1919 in Livorno is one of them. On their honeymoon, my dad took my mom to Rome for the first time in early December of 1945 and they had an audience with Pope Pius XII and shook His Holiness hand. My mother who was born in poverty (dignified poverty though) lost everything and I mean everything due to bombing in Livorno saw the outfits of high ranking prelates and she said it made her somewhat nauseated given what the rest of Italy was experiencing.
Thus, while I would prefer slightly more ornate vestments for the pope, the vestments that Pope Francis wears are dignified, not cheap and worthy of the Mass.
Where those priest who love the EF Mass go wrong, in my estimation, as well as Cardinal Burke, is the insistence on a specific style of ornate vestments that are a bit over the top today and certainly too fussy. The Gothic style chasuble was used prior to Vatican II in addition to the Roman chasuble. But the Fiddle-back chasuble is even more truncated that the Roman which is fuller, much fuller as given example by some that Pope Benedict wore, although he never excluded the Gothic style.
I often thought Pope Benedict may have over-corrected in his choice of frilliness.
Now for stoles and chasuble since the 1970's. These too can be quite awful and distracting, and I think we know what these are as Pope Benedict's MC that "bad" Marino placed His Holiness in one of the worst examples of it when Pope Benedict traveled to Austria. Pope Francis in his simplicity as far as liturgical tastes has never ventured into that extreme in modern chasubles.
My educated guess is that Cardinal Burke does not possess a personal cappa magna, and doesn't have any affection for them. Based on knowing that a number of places he's visited have gone to great lengths to arrange for a cappa magna for him to use while there--as we could certainly do if he ever visited our local Latin Mass community, as befits his dignity as the Church's virtually sole and surely most courageous defender of the Faith, in the face of a papacy not fulfilling its appointed duty to do this. And that Card. Burke, showing the true humility that the afore-mentioned only pretends to, invariably submits patiently and generously to what is expected of him in using what is provided.
Here's an interesting commentary on the cappa magna:
Please allow me to respond to two letters that appeared in your May 31 issue concerning the liturgical use of the cappa magna at the solemn pontifical Mass celebrated by Bishop Slattery in Washington, D.C.
Bishop Slattery has received close to 2,000 letters and e-mail messages from 13 countries around the world commenting on the prayerfulness of that Mass and the depth of comfort the faithful found in his homily.
The cappa magna does indeed represent the finery of the world, its power and prestige. That is why after his entrance wearing it, the prelate is publicly stripped of this finery and humbled before the congregation. Then, vestment by vestment, the bishop is clothed in the new man of which St. Paul speaks, including the baptismal alb, the dalmatic of charity, the stole of pardon and the chasuble of mercy. When finally clothed in Christ, the prelate makes a second entrance into the church to begin the eucharistic celebration in persona Christi, the visible head of the body, the church.
It was a clear statement that the power and prestige of the world have no place at the altar, but it is expressed in a liturgical ritual or symbol, which, unfortunately, are often lacking in the contemporary rites and thus hard to grasp.
Maybe in our society he could come in with tuc with tails and top hat and cane and do the same thing!
Father McDonald,
Well at least he isn't wearing a sport coat that belongs in a gay pride parade! I thought you were tolerant. Your comment was on the same low level of Kavanaugh,
Today the wearer of the Cappa is not a prince. In the past, some who wore the Cappa were princes, holding secular/civic power in various times and places. In those times and places they adopted the secular accoutrements of secular power, aping the regalia of the powerful in a fallen world.
Matthew 20:25-27: But Jesus summoned them and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and the great ones make their authority over them felt. But it shall not be so among you. Rather, whoever wishes to be great among you shall be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave."
The Cappa never was intended to be a sign of servanthood. That the wearer removes the Cappa before Mass begins, but replaces it with silk and brocade and damask of the highest (and most expensive) order, is also not a sign of servanthood. Laying aside one set of regal vestments and putting on another is meaningless.
A hat may be worn with a tuxedo, which is semi-formal attire. But a top hat is properly worn when one is in a formal morning suit with waistcoat and cravat or necktie, or evening attire - white tie and tails.
Anonymous aka Kavanuagh at 12:39 PM,
What I posted was intended for legitimate discussion. It raised a point of view with a rationale that most of us, creatures of the 20th and 21st centuries, may have not considered. If you can attack the cappa magna and dismiss it out of hand, what is your defense for the chasuble or cope?
The chasuble and cope are not symbols of secular princely power, now are they?
And, that you post anything for "legitimate discussion" is a laugh.
Anonymous aka Kavanaugh,
The cappa magna and the cope have striking similarities. I am sure the left-wing loon segment of the Church finds the cope quite offensive since it resembles a monarch's cappa!
Instead of your simpleton answers why not address the symbolism the author of the piece I posted suggests.
Anonymous aka Kavanaugh,
Chew on this:
The chasuble developed from a garment that was worn in these early centuries by, at first, non-Roman citizens (who could not legally wear the toga), but which gradually came to also be worn by Roman citizens, and even Roman officials for public occasions. This garment is what became the chasuble, or “casula”, a large garment of conical shape. It reached almost to the feet apparently, and the material was bunched up to the sides to allow the arms to be outside the garment. Readers may already recognize this sort of look in the vestments found in many mediaeval images of priests and bishops, wherein numerous deep folds are visible – moreso than can be seen in our modern, less ample gothic form.
So the chasuble was used by Roman officials for public occasions. By by
Non-Roman citizens wore the predecessor of the chasuble, as did a few "Roman officials for public occasions."
I imagine more than a few non-Roman citizens also wore some kind of undergarments (subligacuilum), as did a few "Roman officials for public occasions."
Using your line of argument, priests should not be wearing underwear since the precedent of a few "Roman officials for public occasions" seems determinative...
I would encourage priests to keep wearing underwear. As the ancient Latin teaches, Semper ubi sub-ubi!"
Post a Comment