Translate

Friday, August 28, 2020

WHEREIN THE BLOG MASTER MAKES A CORRECTION ON A COMMENT, AS HE IS PRONE TO DO


On a previous post on the Liturgy, I wrote this most astute comment:


I had a funeral once and had planned the liturgy with the family, only to have a relative from another state intervene with her own lists of songs to be sung. I ignored it. But along the way, we were taught that others should plan the liturgy no matter how poor their choices are. Then at the wake service she asked for her family member to read the Scripture and her children to bring up the gifts. I told her no,we have suspended bringing up the gifts, we don't need eucharistic ministers and we had already chosen a lector at the meeting I had with the family. She said, well, how are we to participate and I said, but doing so from the pew. That's the most important act of participation. she didn't realize that, given how we have clericalized the laity in our liturgy. 
August 25, 2020 at 3:51 PM

AnonymousThen, Fr. Michael Kavanaugh wrote:

"Liberals have many straw men, Latin, ad orientem and certainly the EF Mass. Lay participation becomes a god,...

There's a pretty obvious straw man right there, Fr. ALLAN McDonald. Lay participation isn't a "god," it isn't worshipped. 

Lay participation, including EM's and lectors, is fosterred and welcomed by the Church as a good. 

There are always those who go to extremes in their views, both traddies and VAT II spiriters. But lay participation isn't a bad thing per se.
August 25, 2020 at 4:19 PM
More of my most astute comments:
If the good Father had read my entire comment, he would have read that I told the woman who was meddling in her relative’s funeral plans that at my meeting with the parent, a lector was chosen (by the father) and (I had contacted the person to confirm he would be the reader).
The relative, then asked me (at the wake of all places) if her daughter could be the lector. I said the deceased father had chosen the lector and I confirmed with the lector to be. Then she asked if anyone could be a Eucharistic Minister. I said we no longer provide the (pandemic producing) common chalice and have no need for additional Eucharistic Ministers since I and our parochial vicar would distribute the Host. 
Then she asked if her family could present the offerings. I said, no because we no longer do that. 
THEN SHE SAID, HOW COULD THEY PARTICIPATE IN THIS FUNERAL, TO WHICH I SAID, BY PARTICIPATING ACTIVELY FROM THEIR PLACE IN THE CHURCH. 
Of course my implied point is that lay participation isn’t in the Clericalizing  the the laity in this, that or the other or making the lay ministries into gods. 
A lay lector was chosen. Altar servers chosen. Cantor chosen. But this northeast Catholic family member did not think what she and her family do from the pew in terms of active/actual participation was good enough. What rubbish!

And now directors of the Ordinary Form of the Mass have another issue concerning inclusivity into the formal lay ministries of the Ordinary Form. In Argentina, and one of its more conservative dioceses, a new bishop unwittingly asked a “woman” to pray one of the petitions at a Mass. He has been praised by the left wing of the Church, the heterodox, because this “woman” was actually a biological man, a gender given him by his Creator, God, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. But that gift of gender was not to his pleasing or what he “felt” he was so he transitioned to becoming a ‘woman” which is an impossibility according to his genetic makeup created by God. Thus he either mutilated  his body to appear as a woman or he dressed as a woman, either way, he is not a woman. And what he is doing is immoral. And for him to be asked to do any formal ministry at Mass is an implicit or explicit endorsement by the Church that gender ideology is no problem, the ideology of inclusivity must trump orthodox Catholic teaching that God is our creator and the one who blesses us with our gender, male and female He created us.

But the god of lay participation says we must, we must, we must, in the name of the god of inclusivity include LGBTQ+++ in every aspect of lay ministries, including the priesthood and religious life, not to mention, lector’s, communion ministers, cantors, especially if they are front and center, and altar servers. This is called idolatry, pagan idolatry at that.

Transgender woman’s role at Mass stirs controversy in Argentina

  • Inés San Martín
    Aug 28, 2020

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is just so stunningly WRONG. However, the fact that this is taking place in Pope Francis home country does not surprise me at all.

Fr. Michael Kavanaugh said...

"If the good Father had read my entire comment, he would have read that I told the woman who was meddling in her relative’s funeral plans that at my meeting with the parent, a lector was chosen (by the father) and (I had contacted the person to confirm he would be the reader)."

Fr. ALLAN McDonald, I read your full comment.

You've still not offered evidence that lay participation has become a "god." It hasn't, so I'll not be holding my breath while I wait.

Also, including lectors, EM's, etc, is not a "clericalization" of them. It is a recognition that, as Baptized Christians, they have a rightful place in the celebration of the liturgy that was unrecognized iun times past.

We can be grateful that we have overcome that clerical blindness.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Tisk, tisk, as you have not read Pope Francis' warnings about clericaling the laity who more than want to be clericalized and ordained deacons who are clerics who also want to act as priest by exclusive focus on liturgy and not what they are ordained to do. Tisk, tisk, and the use of the pejorative "god out of something" is precisely that, pejorative. Obviously you missed that and focus on it in a literal or fundamentalist way and miss the point of my post. tisk, tisk.

Fr. Michael Kavanaugh said...

Tsk - that's how it's spelled - tsk, I have read the Holy Father's warnings.

Tsk, tsk, keep trying. You may fall into a decent response along the way.

We can be grateful that we have overcome liturgical clerical blindness.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Well, in this day of false gods, can't i have a spelling false god, all things being equal, you know. And I spell most words correctly except when I don't. That should justify my misspelling.

Fr. Michael Kavanaugh said...

You can have any false god you choose. There's no reason you should not add one more to your growing collection.

They remain, however, false gods, and should be destroyed.

John Nolan said...

Talking of clerical blindness, Fr Kavanaugh should read Redemptionis Sacramentum para.151 before peddling the false notion that the purpose of EMs is to enable the laity to take their 'rightful place' in the celebration of the liturgy.

rcg said...

FrMK: when the new translation of the NO was published our parish had several groups organised to review and study. One of the group leaders told us that if the Church ever stopped offering the Cup at Communion that he would leave the Church. He understood the concept of intinction but said that was invalid after Vatican II.

Later, there was a “Liturgical Working Group” where the new Liturgical translation was being sorted out for the parts of the laity to perform. There were samples of ‘rewording for clarity of purpose”. I asked what was wrong with what was in the missal, the leaders said that it made it more relevant to adapt to modern speech.

Likewise, a search for better music was made among Protestant sources for “more enjoyable and understandable” songs.

Prominent in all os this was a strong Methodist influence from people who had left the Church for Methodist worship but had returned to influence the mode of worship in that Catholic parish. Maybe not quite Bella Dodd, but they were open about what they were doing. All of it depended on the ignorance of the laity due to the lack of proper catechesis for two generations in the rest of the parish; I have not yet decided if the people involved are a Fifth Column or just stupid. The priest at that time enjoyed vacations to alternative spirituality camps and once said in homily an apparent attempt to echo St Paul, but actually covering his Light with a basket, that he was OK with someone choosing to be Wiccan but he chose to be Catholic.

In the current era the actual roles of clergy and laity in many, if not most, NO parishes are very confused, not just exchanged.

Anonymous said...

John Nolan, thanks for that reference. Any lay person in extraordinary ministry should commit this to memory:

151.] Only out of true necessity is there to be recourse to the assistance of extraordinary ministers in the celebration of the Liturgy. Such recourse is not intended for the sake of a fuller participation of the laity but rather, by its very nature, is supplementary and provisional.[252] Furthermore, when recourse is had out of necessity to the functions of extraordinary ministers, special urgent prayers of intercession should be multiplied that the Lord may soon send a Priest for the service of the community and raise up an abundance of vocations to sacred Orders.[253]

We should all commit to prayer “...that the Lord may soon send a Priest for the service of the community and raise up an abundance of vocations to sacred Orders.” Not to mention prayer for existing priests to hold fast to their role in promulgating only true Church teaching, otherwise their teaching authority is compromised and suspect.

Anonymous said...

Just to offer my 2 cents for what its worth......it is the lay ministers who have made THEMSELVES God's in my parish. They are the least humble people ......and they fail to see that Ministry is a call and a privilege....NOT a RIGHT and something they are entitled to. I fully understand where Father McDonald is coming from........perhaps if they committed to memory what anonymous @ 1:40 wrote above, we would not see such a lack of humility amongst other things.

John Nolan said...

Whatever 'participatio actuosa' is, it is not achieved by giving selected people special roles which set them apart from the rest. I have no objection to lay readers on principle, but one person reading and everyone else listening doesn't empower the laity. Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are still, in many places, referred to as 'special ministers' or, worse, 'Eucharistic ministers' and despite RS and other admonitions their employment more often than not constitutes an abuse.

Those who serve in the sanctuary are usually laypeople who are substituting for clerics 'ex temporanea deputatione'. In most parishes they wear clerical choir dress (cassock and cotta) but that does not mean they are 'clericalized'. Although women and girls are permitted to serve at the altar under strictly defined conditions and only in the Ordinary Form, it is arguable that they should not adopt clerical dress since they can never be clerics and therefore cannot substitute for them.

Monsieur said...

I noticed Father Kavanaugh slinks away quietly when he has been corrected

John Nolan said...

Non, Monsieur. Il recule pour mieux sauter.

Monsieur said...

John Nolan,

Bien sur!

Fr. Michael Kavanaugh said...

What is written in Redemptionis Sacramentum regarding full, active, and conscious participation in the liturgy by the laity might not have been considered a possibility 40 or 50 year earlier. There may have been a few scattered bishops and theologians who were thinking this way, but they might have been rare as hens' teeth. I see it in a positive light in terms of the direction the Church should be going in this regard.

With the recognition of the dignity of all the Baptized, a dignity that had sacrcely been thought much of at all in terms of the Church's liturgical worship, and with the developments in thinking about ecclesiology regarding the proper roles of both laity and clergy, things began to change. The rear guard action of the traditionalists will, in time, be seen as such.

Lectors, Eucharistic Ministers, girls serving at the altar, parish/pastoral councils, laity participating in ecumenical councils even as "observers," baptized Christrians from other denominations in the same role - these are steps that we have begun to take to implement what the Church understands to be God's will for us.

I understand that some here will, for a variety of motivations, not share this view.

It is a process that is on-going and, I would suggest irreversible. Change comes quickly here and slowly there. But everything must change, nothing stays the same.

Fr. Allan J. McDonald said...

Vatican II's ethos of the universal call to holiness to include the laity. The other aspect I appreciate is the call to the clergy and religious not to treat the laity as children, in the childish sense, but to see them as co-workers.

In terms of the liturgy, some 50+ years since Vatican II,a legitimate critique should take place in terms of mandated Latin for the sake of "universalism" across the growing smaller world in which we live. I suspect one could begin with what is required for validity being in Latin. Then perhaps the Gloria, Sanctus, Pater Noster, Agnus Dei. Vatican II asked the Latin be retained, but some vernacular. Almost immediately vernacular became the norm. The problem is that the VII fathers gave no specifics or generalities. But maintain Latin and allow for some vernacular seems pretty clear and that what we now have isn't what they requested. And useless repetition isn't clear nor noble simplicity.

Of course the active/actual participation in the liturgy is a very good principle in order that the Laity are engaged in the liturgy. I have said it before and I will say it again, when the dialogue Mass came in 1958, my father got all three of his children a St. Joseph Missal and we were taught how to use it during Mass and how to look up an upcoming Sunday Mass in order to look at the changing parts of the Mass and be familiar with them. We were asked not to pray the rosary or do other devotions although it certain wasn't an order and many older Catholics continued to do so and brought their rosaries to with them to the communion rail.

We always had choirs, ushers and altar boys as well as cantors/scholas. The addition of lectors is not ill conceived but of Eucharistic Ministers randomly chosen, no concern about lifestyle or belief and permanently is more problematic. EMHC are not needed unless they are needed, and thus should be rare. A handful of well trained installed acolytes would be sufficient.