This is stunning! Thank you Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI and the Archbishop of Denver for allowing the recovery of this magnificent form to the Mass. And thank you to the rector of the Basilica Cathedral for allowing this form of the Mass to be at the historic high altar. Very gracious to say the least!
Monday, March 29, 2021
IN A TERRIBLY TRAGIC AND SAD EXPERIENCE, THE EXTRAORDINARY FORM REQUIEM DOES NOT WHITEWASH THE GRAVITY OF THE HUMAN SITUATION BUT MARVELOUSLY COMMENDS THE FAITHFUL DEPARTED TO ALMIGHTY GOD’S DIVNE MERCY BRINGING THE GRIEF OF SURVIVORS TRUE SOLACE BY LANCING THE GRIEF
No Eagle’s Wings; no Be not Afraid, no White Vestments; no Here I am Lord; no Alleluias; but a dirge like cathartic medicine for the soul of the Faithful Departed, tragically murdered and lancing the grief of family, friends and others in attendance or watching. The pastor of Officer Tally’s parish, acting as deacon for the Mass, preaches a stunning, absolutely stunning homily. It should be used to teach seminarians how to preach a homily at a funeral! The Archbishop offers words prior to the homily as well.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
27 comments:
That is so powerful, “He does not wish to be canonized at his requiem Mass. But there is ample evidence for hope for his disposition.”
What did Officer Tally’s predecessor say? Dómine, non sum dignus, ut intres sub tectum meum, sed tantum dic verbo, et sanábitur ánima mea.
Also, I liked how Fr. Nolan took the opportunity to use the Latin grammar to augment his point. I think this a significant advantage to using Latin, it guides you to understanding the message more deeply. I think it is a huge advantage to the priest.
The homilies was Fr. Jim Jackson,FSSP. Yes, I am sure God was powerfully worshipped and the family and friends consoled by having the meaning of a deponent verb explained to them.
Homilist, not homilies.
You just gotta butt in and say something snide even regarding a funeral. Go to confession you pathetic sinful wretch.
Yes, He was, actually.
I am impressed by someone who obviously knows a little Latin and equally obviously considers themselves an expert "power worshipper". The wonderful reply also obviously all about him and self-aggrandisement all along.
Equally impressed must be the Creator to see His Holy Name employed in a snide putdown of funeral, and I would about bet the poster will be finding out just how droll it was found to be.
...and thanks also to Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, without whom, this form of the Mass might not have survived. His patient perseverence under the iron fist of selective authoritarianism is what kept it alive.
His day will come. I suspect that, in eternity, it already has.
Gentlemen, gentlemen!
Let the middle-schoolers squabble about who is an "expert" and presuming to know what other people are thinking.
This is supposed to be a friendly forum. Practice your aggressions against the Enemy.
Reluctant Ref,
Except there are those who post here that support intrinsic evil
Our snide Latinist putdown artist made patently clear his thoughts, and it takes no amazing psychic powers to recognize the intentional putdown, nor any difficulty in the Holy Name being profaned.
Seeing as how "ref" is only calling flags on respondents to the sacrilege and insult to the funeral, while ignoring both of the above, and claiming (inevitably) to be the voice of pure reason (which he can NEVER resist), three guesses, folks.
The ref lacks reasoning powers. Reason would preclude a faithful catholic from voting for the Abortion Party
,
Father McDonald said..."Thank you Popes John Paul II, Benedict XVI and the Archbishop of Denver for allowing the recovery of this magnificent form to the Mass."
Said Popes offered the same, holy, simple, liturgical peace plan against which, unfortunately, the Church's two extreme wings have waged war.
The simple plan: Offer the two forms of the Roman Rite to the Faithful. Those who wish to worship via the OF may do so. Those who wish to worship via the EF may do so.
It is that simple. It is common sense.
Unfortunately, speaking generally, the left-wing wages war daily against the EF. The left-wing has worked overtime to keep the EF from those who wish to worship via the TLM.
The left-wing despises the TLM. They expect everybody to march in lockstep with their hateful, anti-TLM attitude.
The right-wing despises the Novus Ordo. They expect everybody to march in lockstep with their hateful, anti-Novus Ordo attitude.
Neither extreme wing of the Church accepts the liturgical peace plan offered by our holy Popes.
Popes Saint John Paul II, and Benedict XVI, were unrelenting in their support of the Novus Ordo. They would not budge one inch in that regard.
They refused to accept the right-wing's assault upon the Novus Ordo.
However, they recognized the Faithful's right to worship via the TLM.
Our holy Popes praised by Father McDonald worked to secure liturgical peace. Their similar liturgical peace plans would accomplish that.
But left-wing TLM-haters, as well as right-wing Novus Ordo-haters, prefer liturgical warmongering to liturgical peace.
But I believe that holy priests, including Father McDonald, who, in line with the liturgical peace plan in question, offer the two forms of the Roman Rite, are pioneers in the movement to secure liturgical peace within the Western Church.
Said priests, in line with our holy Popes' liturgical peace plan in question, are the Western Church's future.
Said priests will win the day, in regard to liturgical peace, for the Western Church.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Y'all have some pretty odd notions about what constitutes sacrilege, insult, profanation, and/or putdown.
"Saying something I don't like or I don't agree with" is none of the above.
I am the Reluctant Ref and I am not a priest, I am not Fr. Kavanaugh and I have never met Fr. Kavanaugh and I am not pro abortion.
As far as insulting my "reasoning" abilities go...maybe you are right. I am probably not as intelligent as many of the people posting here.
I am just tired of seeing us insult each other. I frequently post anonymously and I usually side with tradition (small and large T).
Regardless of where any of us stand, there is no need for us to be so mean to each other. Being anonymous is a privilege. I fear too many of us are abusing it--myself included sometimes.
Words fail...but Absolutely stunning! Thanks so much for posting this Father. May God, in His Divine Mercy, grant this good man’s soul eternal rest, and may his family be supported in every way needed. This funeral Mass surely exalted God and comforted all who assisted/witnessed.
The homilist was surely wrong about deponent verbs. They are active in meaning but passive in form; they are not ambivalent as to voice. 'Revereor' must be translated in the active voice, and it is transitive (i.e it takes a direct object).
I also thought the good father's alleged symbolism concerning bleached/unbleached candles nonsensical. Traditionally the altar candles in a Requiem Mass are unbleached. The fact that they were white indicates that the basilica did not have an unbleached set. Not unusual, but hardly symbolic.
What interested me were the quotations from two great Englishmen, Cardinal Newman and Samuel Johnson. Dr Johnson had a morbid fear of death; his Protestant religion denied him the consolation of purgatory and he was terrified of eternal damnation. St John Henry was one of the greatest prose writers of the Victorian age and the long extract we heard was an excellent example of his literary style.
What his 21st century listeners, many of whom would have been non-Catholics, made of it is another matter. I suspect it was as incomprehensible to them as was the Latin liturgy. Perhaps our resident expert in 'editing American English' might give us the benefit of his wisdom.
I hope Officer Tally is officially commended for his bravery and self-sacrifice. At present the police on both sides of the pond are getting a bad press. Our lot, despite a predilection for dressing up as Robocop and toting machine guns would no doubt have waited for back-up and conducted a comprehensive risk assessment before intervening. That is, if they were not too busy breaking up peaceful gatherings or investigating imaginary 'hate incidents'.
Although I am not an "expert in editing American English," I am a person who regularly uses his native tongue both in speaking and writing to communicate effectively with other speakers of American English. I am told that I do this very well.
The work of Saint John Henry, inasmuch as it is not the product of translation from Latin under the unfortunate guidelines established by Liturgiam Authenticam, and inasmuch as it is not used in the public worship of our Church, isn't something I feel the need to expend my "wisdom" commenting on.
Yes, his writing is a fine example of the literary style of his Victorian Age. That Age is gone, as is the Victorian manner of speaking and mode of writing. Newman's style, elegant as it may be, yet, as noted, incomprehensible, isn't use to communicate today for that very good reason.
But thanks for the mention, John.
Father K,
Yes, we have morphed into the lowest common denominator, “woke” English, which is an embarrassment
Yes, Mike, if the English of Newman, Dickens, Trollope or (to use American examples) Walt Whitman and Mark Twain is incomprehensible, that says much about contemporary standards of literacy, or rather lack of them.
No hope for Shakespeare, then. Nor for English liturgy, not that I have any intention of attending the same.
I suggest there's a fair difference - no, make that a vast difference between the English of Newman and that of Twain.
And there should be. Their audiences and purposes for writing were different, as were the times and cultures that birthed them. Language does not always age well, including one's native tongue.
I suspect the incomprehensibility of the Newman passage cited by Fr. Jackson, is more related to your outlook on life than to the standards of literacy in far-away Denver.
Dear John Nolan and Father Kavanaugh,
I am teaching AP Language and Composition for the first time this year. One of the things I have to prepare my students for is questions related to "deep readings" of various texts. My students are the best that my school has to offer. That said, their limited knowledge of modern vocabulary is concerning. If I present them with any text composed before 1950, most of them seem lost. Yes, Newman and Twain (Clemens) had radically different ways of expressing themselves, but both authors present challenges to the post-literate generations that we cannot imagine. I am trying to encourage the students to read a 19th century novel during Spring Break just to familiarize themselves with the different cadences and syntaxes of a different era. I might as well ask them to get their pilot's license. Contemporary standards for literacy exist in curriculum frameworks. The reality is a far different thing. Gravely different.
About the most positive thing I can say is that I refuse to give up. We can't afford to give up on these kids.
“Father” Kavanaugh,
Since your political party is home to BLM, Antifa, etc., I can understand your reticence to embrace proper English. When retranslating the Mass as you are used to, Minneapolis street English might be the way to go. Is there a street English word for “abortion” you might prefer? Oh silly me, your party calls it “healthcare.”
Professor Kumpel, ask them to read it aloud. It will force comprehension.
'I suspect the incomprehensibility of the Newman passage ... is more related to your outlook on life than to the standard of literacy in far-away Denver.' (Mike Kavanaugh).
I am trying to make sense of that sentence. I am aware that Mike likes to attribute to me attitudes and outlooks which I do not have. But I don't find the Newman passage incomprehensible, far from it. So what is the link to my putative outlook on life?
When I was ten years old I read and enjoyed Kenneth Grahame's 'Wind in the Willows'. Published in 1908 it is seen as first and foremost a children's book, yet how many ten-year-olds nowaday would or could read it? They might enjoy the movie, but that's not the same thing.
At the same age I read Jerome K Jerome's 'Three Men in a Boat' (1889) and found it hilarious. The wistful irony of the late Victorian age did not seem at all dated. I devoured 'Huckleberry Finn' although the setting and the vernacular were far removed from suburban England circa 1961.
A post-literate generation? A sad and frightening prospect, but all too real. Recently a fairly respectable university (Leicester) dropped Chaucer from its English curriculum as being no longer 'relevant'.
I suspect disgraced and excommunicated Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre is already well on the way to being thoroughly cremated having been burning in the eternal fires of Hell for decades now.
I suspect you can't move in hell for expert theologians ...
Post a Comment