2010’S CATHOLIC STEWARDSHIP VIDEO FROM SAINT JOSEPH CHURCH IN MACON BUT IT WAS FILMED AND PRODUCED DURING THE 2010 LENTEN AND EASTER SEASON AND STARTS WITH THE GREAT VIGIL OF EASTER!

 I just now came across this excellent video on Catholic Stewardship. It was produced in 2010 by volunteers at St. Joseph Church in Macon when I was pastor there. Many of the videos and images were taken during the Lenten/Easter Season of that year. The Great Vigil of Easter at St. Joseph Church in 2010 begins the video. This video is about 14 minutes long, but very inspirational. I am so proud of my parishioners then. At the Easter Vigil, Lewis King is received into the Church. Today he is Father Lewis King. I also see so many who have gone home to the Lord and others who have had life changing sorrows. Praised be Jesus Christ…

IS IT POSSIBLE THAT JUDAS WHO BETRAYED OUR LORD IS A SAINT IN HEAVEN?

Poor Judas has been vilified throughout the centuries. Even Jesus said it would have been better for him if he had not been born. Did Jesus see the future vilification of poor Judas and lament that?

How culpable is Judas for what he did to our Lord in the betrayal. Is he any more culpable than any of us who betray Jesus over and over again through our mortal sins, our disillusionment, our love of sin rather that of Jesus?

Yes, Judas, as a result of the Original Sin of Adam and Eve, was a corrupt sinner. However, Adam and Eve’s original sin was caused, by the way, by the devil, the Archangel Lucifer, who tempted them, has disordered everything in God’s original pristine and perfect condition, humans and every thing created became disordered and tainted by the devil who knew he could tempt God’s people but not God. The devil could tempt and cause people to sin and become corrupt but not God! Remember, Satan tries that with Jesus in the desert, but Satan fails!

When we read the Gospel of John, we are told that at the betrayal the Devil enters Judas. This is something the devil did not do to Adam and Eve. He didn’t take them over by possession, he merely tempted them and they gave in. But Judas is another story—the devil possesses him.

I would contend that at that point, Judas was not culpable for anything he did as  his free will was compromised by demonic possession. This then prevented Judas, after the betrayal, to feel regret and a need for repentance. Demonic possession prevents him from experiencing faith, hope and love. Completely disillusioned by demonic possession, Judas commits suicide, the ultimate act of hopelessness in the devil’s abode.  But he’s possessed and thus his suicide can’t be seen as being done with full consent of the will and with forethought and planing. Even Judas’ hopelessness if a result of demonic possession!

This is the devil’s ploy, to remove the ability of Judas to wait for the resurrection, like St. Peter, and to express sorrow for his betrayal and be forgiven and reconciled by the Glorified Risen Christ. Possession has caused Judas to be devoid of faith, hope and love. 

This is the delusion of Satan, he thinks that he can prevent the salvation of an apostle by possessing him.

Was the Devil wrong? Yes! Dead wrong.

On Holy Saturday, our Lord descends into hell to release all the Old Testament figures who had awaited the coming of the Messiah. But they died prior to the opening of the Gates of Heaven and were stuck in the antechamber of hell, its vestibule, if you will.

When they are released by Jesus and through His Passion and Cross, is it possible that poor Judas was there? 

If so, Judas is a saint in heaven!

The spiritual battle waged by Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is against the world, the flesh and the devil. It isn’t against God’s creatures, human beings. Jesus was not warring with Judas but with the devil

He thwarted the devil as it concerns Judas. And he thwarts the devil as it concerns us. 

Think about it this Holy Saturday. 

Saint Judas, pray for us?

If Judas is in this crowd, the yes, Saint Jude, pray for us!

I THINK THIS WAS A FIRST FOR ME AT HOLY THURSDAY’S EVENING MASS OF THE LORD’S SUPPER, OR AT ANY LITURGY, FOR THAT MATTER…

 So graceful?

Oh well, it is what it is…

After I washed 12 feet, I noticed half way through that my shoe lace had come undone. It was driving me crazy, but I pressed on.

While washing the feet, I kept thinking how I might gracefully tie my shoe during a public Mass where I am on display. 

Well, there was no way to leave  the sanctuary just to tie my shoe in private. The sacristy is not behind the altar, no room is. So, after the Universal Prayer, I sat on my throne, I mean, the celebrant’s chair, bent over, which was a gymnastic exercise for me, in and of itself, and tied the damn shoelace!

I pretended in my mind that no one was watching me, in alb, stole and chasuble at my chair tying my shoelace hunched over in a tall celebrant’s chair to do it. I guess I could have had a deacon do it?

YIKES!

 Yikes! Holy Thursday’s Chrism Mass with the pope at St. Peter’s Basilica. Bernini’s baldachin over the main altar is undergoing restoration. This structure and the papal altar are directly above St. Peter’s Crypt containing his bones…

ARE FAITHFUL CATHOLICS BEING PROSELYTIZED BY SOME OF THE HIGHEST MEMBERS OF THE HIERARCHY? I REPORT; YOU RESPOND?

I grew up in the Bible Belt in the late 50’s and throughout the 60’s and 70’s. I know how insidious proselytizing is. Usually Fundamentalist Protestants, but even mainline Protestant denominations proselytize Catholics by putting down the institutional Church, highlighting the corruption in the Church and saying because the Catholic Church was unfaithful to the Bible, we were kicked out of heaven unless we repent and accept Jesus Christ as our personal Lord and Savior. For many fundamentalists, that means you can name the date when you knelt down and accepted Jesus Christ and then found a Bible Belieivng Church which the Catholic Church isn’t according to them

Their proselytizing usually is overt and covert. But the goal is to save Catholics who otherwise will go to hell if they continue practicing the Catholic Faith as prescribed by the Catholic Church.

Today, though, I feel as though some of the highest bishops and cardinals in the hierarchy are trying to do the very same thing to faithful Catholics who believe what the Church teaches and strive to practice the faith in the most traditional way. 

Even Pope Francis results to name calling of this faithful Catholics, though sinners, do not like the liberalization and the move to change orthodox Catholic doctrine, especially moral doctrines and the traditional meaning of all the Sacraments.

Pope Francis calls us rigid, backwards and basically numskulls who are intellectually compromised. 

For the pope to do that or anyone to do that is proselytizing people in a crude way to move them away from what they hold true to something else. 

Cardinal Grech brings me back to the 1970’s seminary I attended and puts forward a new Church that he wants to proselytize Catholics to join by rejecting historic Catholicism. At least he’s honest as he calls for a rainbow church that changes Catholic doctrine and dogma and allows for a multi-prong approach to either heterodox or orthodox Catholicism. It is truly the Twilight Zone and some think that Cardinal who represents the Pope and his theology could become the next Pope. One diocese ordains women, offers LgbTQ marriages and polygamy even for the clergy and another diocese doesn’t in different countries or the same countries. It is the Anglicanfication of the Church:

READ WHAT HE WANTS FOR YOU TO JOIN BY LEAVING THE CATHOLIC CHURCH HERE 

Fortunately we have faithful Cardinals in Africa and elsewhere fighting this crude proselytizing by some of the highest members of the hierarchy. Cardinal Ambongo who is on the board who advices Pope Francis is one of them:

READ WHAT THIS FAITHFUL CARDINAL HAS TO SAY AND THE PROSYLTIZING BY CATHOLIC PRELATES THAT HE NAMES FOR WHAT IT IS AND AS IMPERIALISM COLONIZING OF FAITHFUL CATHOLICS HERE

ARCHBISHOP CHARLES CHAPUT ON THIS HOLY TUESDAY TRIES HEROICALLY TO STEER THE CHURCH IN THE DIRECTION OF THE LIGHT OF CHRIST NOT THE DARKNESS OF WORLD, THE FLESH AND THE DEVIL

As I post this from First Things, we are all horrified how a ship which has lost its navigation and steering abilities and in the darkness crashes into a bridge support causing the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore to collapse entirely and in a few moment and that captured by camera. 

When I went to the seminary in Baltimore in 1976, this bridge was nearing completion and opened for traffic in 1977. It is truly shocking to see its complete destruction in a matter of a few moments.

The Church today is in a similar situation and in fact is in a crisis not seen since the Great Schism or the Protestant Reformation. The barque of Peter is without proper navigation and either intentionally or through naïveté being steered into the world, the flesh and the devil. 

Here is Archbishop Charles Chaput’s critique of Cardinal Fernandez and what is happening to the Church in the past 11 years:

CARDINAL FERNÁNDEZ MISLEADS

by Charles J. ChaputApril 2024

…The pope’s obvious distaste for U.S. Church leadership and American Catholic life may be rooted in a lack of knowledge, and it’s deeply frustrating. But his critical attitude toward wealthy nations of the Global North, and especially the United States, is not unwarranted.

In Francis’s defense, we also need to remember that over a lifetime of ministry, a priest will hear thousands of confessions. Many will involve sincere persons struggling with impossibly complex circumstances. Francis is keenly attuned to their burdens. Merely quoting the catechism in such cases offers little solace. It also lacks humanity. The temptation to confirm, or at least to soothe, otherwise well-meaning people in their sinful behaviors and relationships can be intense.

This helps to explain the pope’s frequent complaints about backwardism, rigidity, and “fixism” in Catholic thought. It explains his many criticisms of a purportedly unforgiving clergy. It explains his dislike for “doctors of the law” and his loose approach to canonical issues. It explains his irritation with the intellectual gravitas and precision of his immediate predecessors. It explains his studied ambiguity on certain matters of doctrine and ecclesial discipline. It explains his refusal to live in the Vatican’s Apostolic Palace, his disdain for some of the normal formalities of his office, and his habit of feeding confusion with imprudent, and even provocative, public comments. It also explains his peculiar hostility for the old Latin Mass and the alleged reactionaries who “cling” to it—some of them, yes, bitter backsliders and nostalgia addicts, but others who are merely young persons and families seeking beauty, stability, and some connection with the faith’s past in their worship.

It becomes hard to avoid the conclusion that an undercurrent of resentment is one of the distinguishing and most regrettable marks of the Francis pontificate. Regrettable, because it damages the dignity of the petrine office. Regrettable, because it creates critics and enemies, rather than reconciling them. Regrettable, because it undercuts every pontificate’s central task: providing a credible, faithful source of Catholic unity. And the advisers, apologists, and ghostwriters who surround this pontificate have been instrumental in adding to the problem...

READ THE ENTIRE ARTICLE FROM START TO END AND THE STUNNING BUT ACCURATE CRITIQUE OF CARDINAL FERNANDEZ HERE!

WHAT A MESS THE NEXT POPE WILL HAVE TO CLEAN UP—I WONDER WHO WOULD WANT THE JOB?

 

FATHER RAYMOND DE SUOUZA AT FIRST THINGS:

The Holy Father’s eleventh anniversary (March 19) fell at a difficult moment, with a global controversy over his Ukrainian “white flag” remarks, in which he said that Ukraine should negotiate an end to the war with Russia. It is regrettably fitting, as the eleventh year of the pontificate has been a bumpy one for Pope Francis. A year ago it was expected, after the deaths of Pope Benedict XVI and Cardinal George Pell, that the road would be more open for Pope Francis to follow his program. It didn’t go quite that smoothly. 

Even amongst the most fervent supporters of Pope Francis, there is disquiet. Mike Lewis of Where Peter Is wrote in December that “it is time to begin again . . . because many Catholics simply don’t get Pope Francis.” Massimo Faggioli at Commonweal lamented that “there seems to be no prelate at the Vatican who can speak to the Germans on the same theological level that Cardinal Ratzinger or Cardinal Mueller did” and wondered if “a Vatican with a Latin American leadership can mediate the differences between Germany and Africa.” Michael Sean Winters of the National Catholic Reporter confessed that “our wonderful pope is horribly wrong about Ukraine.”

Thus the eleventh year has been difficult. Herewith eleven bumps in the road from March 2023 to March 2024.

READ THE REST THERE

CHRISTMAS WILL NOT BE CELEBRATED IN 2024!

The traditional date of the Solemnity of the Annunciation is March 25th, today as I post this stunning story. 

However since we have begun Holy Week, the Solemnity of the Annunciation, meaning the virgin conception of our Lord in the womb of the Blessed Virgin Mary by the power of the Holy Spirit, is postponed until April 8 of 2024. 

Since our Lord’s Virgin Conception is late this year, according to natural law, the gestation of a child in the womb takes 9 months. When it happens on March 25th, nine months later would be December 25th of the same year.

But this year, since the Virgin Conception of our Lord is late, April 8th, nine months later would be January 8th of 2025! Yes, you read that correctly. There will be no Christmas this year of 2024. I am sure children are devastated. 

But there is a silver lining in this dark cloud for children. In the year of our Lord of 2025, there will be two Christmas Days, January 8, 2025 and December 25, 2025! God is good!

POPE FRANCIS HEALTH CONTINUES ITS STEADY DECLINE. PLEASE PRAY FOR HIM, FOR THE CHURCH, FOR THE CARDINALS WHO WILL ELECT THE NEW POPE AND FOR THE FUTURE NEW POPE ALREADY KNOWN TO GOD…

 The number of the faithful who gather for Pope Francis’ outdoor liturgies continues its dramatic decline. Todas, todas, todas, seems to be one of the many new cliches Pope Francis uses in his colorful language but packs no punch in reality…

FROM CRUX:

RASPY-VOICED POPE SKIPS HOMILY FOR PALM SUNDAY, BUT MANAGES THE ANGELUS

ROME – Speaking aloud briefly and in a raspy voice, and skipping his prepared homily altogether, a clearly fatigued Pope Francis presided over the traditional Palm Sunday Mass today, a liturgy that opens the holiest period on the annual Christian calendar.

Later, the pontiff managed to deliver his traditional Angelus message at the conclusion of the Mass in his own voice, but appeared at times to be struggling to catch his breath.

The 87-year-old pontiff has been struggling for weeks from difficulties in breathing and speaking, related to what the Vatican has described variously as colds, the flu, and bronchitis, and has often asked aides to read his prepared texts aloud at various public events.

During the Palm Sunday Mass, Francis delivered prayers but, at the conclusion of the lengthy Gospel reading, it was announced that he had decided not to deliver his homily, and the liturgy proceeded directly to the Profession of Faith. It was believed to the first time, at least in recent memory, that no homily was delivered during a papal Palm Sunday Mass…

WAS THE KYRIE OMITTED FROM YOUR PALM SUNDAY MASS? MORE THAN LIKLY IF IT WAS THE MODERN FORM, BUT NEVER IN THE ANCIENT FORM

As I astutely wrote recently, the modern Penitential Act of the Mass is a strange truncation of what is the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar in the Ancient Mass. The first two options help to maintain the proper place of the Kyrie, which is after the liturgical absolution. It is the third option that itself has many choices that places the Kyrie before the liturgical absolution. Unfortunately, this third option with many options has a trope followed by Lord have mercy; a second trope followed by Christ have mercy; and a third trope followed by Lord have mercy and then the absolution. 

The stand alone Kyrie after the liturgical absolution clearly tells the truth about the Kyrie: IT ISN’T A PENITENTIAL ACT BUT AND ACT OF PRAISE FOR GOD’S MERCY.

Palm Sunday and any Mass that omits the Penitential Act also omits the Kyrie because whoever designed the new Missal did not understand that the Kyrie isn’t penitential. It’s an act of praise. For example if the Rite of Blessing and Sprinkling Holy Water is used, the free standing Kyrie is omitted. 

However, although the Sprinkling of Holy Water Rite has a slightly different liturgical absolution, there is no reason why the free-standing Kyrie can’t be chanted following that absolution. It should not be omitted!

And what about Palm Sunday? No matter the option of what kind out palm procession there is, once the palms are blessed and the priest arrives at the altar during the Entrance Chant, once the hym is concluded the priest launches directly into the Collect of the Day. 

What should have been done, in keeping with a long, long tradition, maybe 1,600 years, the Kyrie would still have been chanted prior to the Collect of the Day.

The Palm Sunday Masses I celebrate this Palm Sunday will have the free standing Kyrie chanted in Greek prior to the Palm Sunday Collect.

Am I the only one who does this correctly in contradiction of the incorrect omission of it in the Modern Missal?

CLOWN MASSES ARE NOT SUPPRESSED BUT THE TRADITIONAL LATIN MASS IS! WHERE’S THE JUSTICE?

 This is a recent photo of a modern Mass in Germany. Yes, Germany, no surprise! Apart from the ridiculous manner of the celebration of the Mass which does nothing to build up Catholics and the true Faith, but rather ridicules and mocks it as Christ was mocked, spit upon and ridiculed at His Passion, please note the new Vatican II accoutrements in what was once a spectacular sanctuary that back in the day did not mock, spit upon or ridicule God’s holy people or the Christ but formed solid Catholics. 

IS SYNODALITY, WHICH NO ONE EXCEPT THE ELITE IN THE CHURCH UNDERSTAND OR LIKES, PROMOTE THE NOBLE SIMPLICITY THAT VATICAN II TAUGHT?

 This is an interesting Vatican image. Please note that Cardinal Parolin is dead center and Cardinal Fernandez sidelined. And then appropriately to the far left is a person that appears as non-binary or whatever but oddly included as well as a man on the right side in a coat and tie and the bishops and cardinals fail to wear their official bishop cassocks:

You can read what Crux has said about the German Synodal Way and how the Vatican has, in a so-called way, cracked down on it, here:

Vatican reigns in German bishops amid dispute over national reforms

When I read the article, I thought it would show forth a clear Vatican crackdown on the schismatic German bishops and the people who lead them. But the article was so convoluted, I found myself returning to sleep. Who has time for all this complexity of dialogue, discussion, cordial meetings and more meetings and more meetings. The synodal way is all about meetings, more administration, more committees and more and more people, most of whom are control freaks, putting forward their own agenda. It’s an absolute nightmare only enjoyed by the elites who get the power.

And the world knows that Pope Francis’ “Synod on Synodality” is precisely a “Meeting about Meetings!” 

This, then, distracts bishops and their priests from being good shepherds through their priestly ministries of teaching, governing and sanctifying God’s holy people through Word and Sacraments!

A return to noble simplicity is simply to have the world’s Catholics, clergy and laity, once again respect the universal canon law of the Church. Even Pope Francis leads the way in ridiculing it! Then, from there, being faithful to the catechism of the Church, in terms of Scripture and Tradition, and the Faith and Morals of the Church, as well as, natural law, allow for noble simplicity in handing on the faith, organizing dioceses and parishes and bishops’ conferences once called subsidiarity. 

This is called KISS! 
KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID!

SURREAL LIVING WITH POPE FRANCIS…

As we all know, since His Holiness’ election, Pope Francis has lived in the Vatican Hotel called “The Domus”. I hilariously call it “The Vatican Motel Six”. Cardinals, bishops others clergy and the laity can rent rooms there too if they are visiting the Vatican on official business or programs put on by the Vatican.

This past week, Judge Andrew Napolitano (no relationship to me although I was born in Napoli) was with about 20 other Americans who stayed there as they were guess lecturers for a Vatican program. 

This is what Judge Napolitano said about the casual encounters that one might have with Pope Francis who mills around the hotel and eats in its dining room with other guests. Continue to pray for God’s will to be done as Pope Francis tenaciously and bravely holds on to the papacy and keeps on going like the Energizer Bunny despite the major health issues His Holiness has:

“…it was surreal when [His Holiness] was brought in to the guesthouse dining room, using a walker and an assistant at each arm. It was bizarre when he sat with his back to us. I wanted to go up to him and greet him, but the Swiss Guards had warned us not to approach him or call out to him.

Two days later, I turned a corner in the guest house lobby, and there he was, 10 feet away. I gently bowed and whispered “Your Holiness.” He looked at me and moved on.

The Pope is in poor health, can barely speak or walk; and he radiates sadness. I was thrilled to reside in his home for four days, but I don’t think he’ll be there much longer.”

BEING A “RETIRED” PRIEST IS SIMPLY GLORIOUS!

As you may know, as a “senior” priest, euphemistically called “retired”, I help out in three parishes. I live blissfully on Hilton Head Island, aka, Paradise and help in two parishes in the area, Holy Family Church about a mile from my “villa” as condos are called here. And don’t worry, it is a 1,000 square feet villa, with two bedrooms, a general outdoor parking lot, and good luck finding a place close by during the height of the tourist season, and little to no storage. 

I also help at St. Gregory the Great in Bluffton, the Diocese of Charleston’s largest parish with about 6,000 registered households in this retirement Mecca! 

I also go to Savannah regularly to celebrate the TLM at Sacred Heart Church.

Holy Family Church caters to the throngs of tourists that visit Hilton Head Island. I am always impressed that Catholics, even on vacation, make sure to go to Mass and here on HHI a goodly number go to Holy Family’s 8 AM daily Mass! 

In fact, at normal Sunday Masses about 3/4’s of those who attend Mass are visitors!

On Easter Sunday, Holy Family Church has to add many, many more Masses. Several in the church that already seats 1,500 people and several in the social hall that can accommodate up to 300 people.

HERE IS HOLY FAMILY CHURCH’S EASTER SUNDAY SCHEDULE:

These are in the main church that can accommodate up to 1,500 men, women and children:

7:30 AM: Fr. Allan

9:00 AM: Fr. Allan

10:30 AM: Fr. Scott

12:00 Noon: Fr. Scott

1:30 PM: Fr. Scott

3:00 PM (Spanish): Fr. Jose

The Social Hall that accommodates up to 300:

8:00 AM: Fr. Frank, OSB

9:30 AM: Fr. Frank, OSB

11:00 AM: Fr. Allan

While the church normally has ample parking on a stunningly beautiful piece of property,  Parking is a nightmare on Easter Sunday and people have to find free parking blocks away.

Last Easter Sunday was my first time at Holy Family. It was surreal to see so many people coming and going and last Easter Sunday the weather was terrible with major thunderstorms!

KUDOS TO THE CORPORATE LEADERS OF THESE TWO POPULAR GROCERY STORES!

 Both Publix and Aldi will close their stores in observance of Easter Sunday! That’s great. Maybe they should also close on Good Friday too? But let’s praise what they have done! Wonderful!

PODIUM AT THE CELEBRANT’S CHAIR…

 

More and more I am seeing the Modern Mass entirely celebrated at the altar. But the modern Mass instructions require as a norm that the priest preside at the chair for the Introductory Rites, the Credo and Universal Prayers and the Post Communion Rites. 

Often a server holds the Roman Missal for the priest but in awkward ways sometimes obscuring the priest altogether! Often the book is shaking or outside the range of bi and tri focals! 

Thus more churches are using a simple, but tasteful, podium at the Celebrant’s chair. 

At Holy Family Church on Hilton Head Island, everything is done at the altar and the chair for just sitting.

However, just recently, I placed a podium at the chair and it is perfect. I like it and I am in complete control of the Roman Missal without having to hold it myself!

God is good! And I am liturgically correct once again!

DOES THE MODERN MASS OBSCURE THE PASCHAL MYSTERY MADE SO CLEAR IN THE ANCIENT MASS?

 

This is the definition of Paschal Mystery in the glossary of the Catechism of the Catholic Church: Christ's work of redemption accomplished principally by his Passion, death, Resurrection,and glorious Ascension, whereby “dying he destroyed our death, rising he restored our life” (1067; cf. 654).

The Paschal Mystery was abundantly made clear in the mysticism of the Ancient Mass. Although present in the Modern Mass, it is obscured by other factors and disorders in its celebration.

Truly the fuller understanding of the Paschal Mystery must begin before the Incarnation. From all eternity, God so loved the world that He wanted to save all of His creation including the crown of His creation, mankind who had become mired in the disorders of the world and mankind due to the original sin of Adam and Eve which is handed down or inherited by every human being since then except the Blessed Virgin Mary. 

Thus we begin with the Most Holy Trinity and recognize that the Paschal Mystery is not completed in “time” until the return of the Lord for the Second Coming, the consummation of the world and the Final Judgement. Only then will all of creation and all of humanity saved by Christ be properly ordered as we were prior to the fall. 

The modern Mass obscured all of this through a theology that focuses on merely understanding ritual and doctrine in an intelligble way. What is worshipped unwittingly, is not Christ and His Paschal Mystery but rather intelligibility, participation and understanding. All these things an avowed atheist can do. 

And the emphasis on meal rather than the One Sacrifice of the Cross in a gloriously unbloody way distorts the Paschal Mystery and turns it into a fellowship meal, completely horizontal, relational and here and now with little focus on the heavenly banquet where the entire Paschal Mystery is already completed. 

How can we recover the Paschal Mystery’s clarity from the ancient Mass and restore it in a more vivid way in the Modern Mass?

More silence leading to awe and wonder as formal liturgical prayer and ritual is taking place. This is not silence for the sake of silence when no liturgical ritual or prayer is taking place but silence pregnant with liturgical ritual and prayer. The highpoint for this is in the Canon of the Mass prayed in a low voice. 

A quiet canon, using any of the approved Eucharistic Prayers would lead hearts and souls to acknowledge the complete Paschal Mystery especially ad orientem which makes sure that the Eucharistic Prayer isn’t turned into a reenactment of Holy Thursday and the Last Supper. This is the greatest disorder of the modern Mass that obscures the Paschal Mystery, the acting out of the Eucharistic Prayer by the priest before a congregation that is suppose to be a symbol of the Apostles with Jesus at the Last Supper. 

That is nonsensical of course and completely repudiated in the Ancient Mass. But the Modern Mass has led so many clergy and laity to think the apex of the Mass is the reenactment of Holy Thursday’s Last Supper! 

Then a reemphasis on Holy Communion received in a state of Grace, with the proper fast and only those who are in full communion with Christ and His Catholic Church will help to recover the Heavenly Banquet where the saved and sinless glory in the completed Paschal Mystery. All are invited to the Sacrifice and its anticipated hope for the completion of the Paschal Mystery, but not all will enter into the Banquet except those who have received the gift of Salvation which Christ does not impose upon us but simply offer it to us. We for our part and by God’s grace must receive it. Many don’t!

NOW THAT’S A BAPTISMAL POOL!!!

 

WHICH RUBRICS FROM THE 1962 ROMAN MISSAL CAN BE APPLIED TO THE 2011 ROMAN MISSAL?

The general opinion even at the Vatican is that where rubrics are not mentioned for certain actions in the Modern Mass, the 1962 Roman Missal can be used as a source of instruction on these rubrics. The clearest example of this is the use of the Chalice Veil, Burse and liturgical folding and unfolding of the corporal cloth. As well the chalice pall’s use during the Liturgy of the Eucharist has no rubrics in the modern Mass, thus even at St. Peter’s papal Masses, the pall rubrics are from the 1962 Roman Missal.

There are so many options in the Modern Missal. The Penitential Act is one of them and a partial hold-over from the Prayers at the Foot of the Altar. Technically in the 1962 Missal the PATFOTA are private prayers for the priest and other liturgical ministers prior to the beginning of the Mass. For the laity, in the Sung Mass of 1962, the Mass begins with the Entrance Chant (Introit) moving from that and without commentary directly to the 9 fold Kyrie. The Kyrie was not and never was seen as penitential. It was a part of the fixed nature of the Order of Mass for the Laity, separate from the Confiteors at the Foot of the Altar and other penitential private prayers of the priest and his assistants.

The latest Modern Latin Rite Mass is the Ordinariate’s Divine Worship, the Missal, allows for the quiet prayers of the priest to be recited quietly from the 1962 Roman Missal such as the PATFOTA, prayer of the priest ascending to the altar to kiss it and the prayer for kissing the altar. As well the 1962 Offertory Prayers, always prayed in silent voice, can be use in place of the modern offertory prayers and includes the Lavabo and the Suscipiat. 

The double genuflections at the consecrations, the additional kissing of the altar and even the additional Signs of the Cross during the Roman Canon can be done, as well as the Sign of the Cross at the end of the Gloria and Credo and at the Benedictus of the Sanctus!

How kosher is all of this? It is kosher in the Latin Rite’s Ordinariate Missal. It is the patrimony of the Latin Rite easily recovered. Is it a liturgical abuse to recover these?

But back to the Kyrie. don’t use the penitential act with the trope, then Lord have Mercy, trope, Christ have Mercy and the final trope, Lord have Mercy followed by the liturgical absolution. That ties the Kyrie to the Penitential Act which it should not be by Tradition. Always use the Confiteor, or the rarely used second option followed by the liturgical absolution then the stand alone Kyrie, 9 or 6 fold.

HOW DO YOU SPELL SIMPLY MAJESTIC?

 

FATHER RAYMOND DE SUOUZA PRAISES MIKE LEWIS OF THE “WHERE PETER IS” BLOG—VERY INTERESTING

 I love how Father Raymond de Souza writes. He’s clear and interesting to read. This is what he just wrote about all the vitriol of far right heterodox Catholics and the far left heterodox Catholics who defend him. Please note the praise that Father de Souza heaps upon Mike Lewis, I copy from THE CATHOLIC THNG. MY COMMENTS EMBEDDED IN THE TEXT IN RED:

Pope Francis at Eleven 

Fr. Raymond J. de Souza
Saturday, March 16, 2024

To an unusual degree – at least in English – the public presentation of the current pontificate, which marked its eleventh anniversary this week, has been entrusted to various commentators.

The Roman Curia under Pope Francis lacks John Paul-era figures like Cardinals Joseph Ratzinger, Benardin Gantin, Camillo Ruini, Francis Arinze, and Eduardo Pironio (already beatified), who had the stature and following to offer authoritative interpretations.

Under Pope Francis, putatively authoritative interpretations – again, in English – are outsourced to independent figures like Austen Ivereigh (UK), Michael Sean Winters (USA), Massimo Faggioli (Italy), and (in all languages) Fr. Antonio Spadaro. In recent months though, a certain frustration appears to have set in, brought vividly to a head by the Holy Father’s recent comments about Ukraine raising the “white flag” of negotiation, which caused deep dismay among Ukrainian Catholics. (Let’s be clear, I think most sane people of good will prefer a negotiated peace settlement for Ukraine which respect the integrity and borders of that independent country. HOWEVER, the pope was asked a question about a “white flag solution” which is basically an unconditional surrender. The pope, because he speaks too much to newspapers and loves off-the-cuff remarks, unthinkingly and uncritically parroted the reporter’s use of “white flag” meaning unconditional surrender and that is what made the mess and this pope over and over and over again captures defeat out of victory with off-the-cuff remarks.)

I offer as an example my preferred source for Francis-friendly hermeneutics: Where Peter Is ^[1] (WPI) a site run by Mike Lewis. He founded it in 2018 to offer “an apologetical approach ^[2]” to Pope Francis in face of his critics. I consider him a good model of the dialogue that the Holy Father calls for.

“We’ve explained at great length the traditional Catholic understanding of papal primacy and authority,” Lewis writes. “We have repeatedly clarified what the Church teaches on the role of the living Magisterium. On many controversial questions, we’ve responded in great detail with the Church’s position on every debated aspect of an issue multiple times. Six years ago, we wanted to start a website that helped explain Pope Francis to our fellow Catholics who claimed to be ‘confused’ by him and his teachings. We’ve made the case for Pope Francis’s teachings throughout this time.”

WPI’s commentaries are serious, well-researched, and careful. For example, recent posts on concelebration ^[3] and traditionalists ^[4], or the ontological non-superiority of priests ^[5] were comprehensive, theologically competent, and fair. WPI has its point of view, but often shows respect to those it is criticizing. It is unabashedly in the Holy Father’s corner at all times, but that is not a bad thing to say about Catholics – and in the environment this pontificate has engendered it is understandable. Partisanship abounds.

For those who wish to keep abreast of the wackier things going on in the wild internet precincts of those truly deranged by Pope Francis ^[6], WPI has the patience and doggedness to report on it ^[7].

So it was noteworthy in December that, while defending Fiducia supplicans ^[8] on blessings for irregular and same-sex couples, Lewis proposed a new year’s resolution “to begin again with Pope Francis ^[9].” He suggested that it’s time to go back and start over with Evangelii gaudium, which had a profound influence on Lewis.

“If this week in the Church has shown anything, it’s that many Catholics simply don’t get Pope Francis. Particularly in the US – although clear cracks have appeared in Germany, Africa, and Eastern Europe as well – there is a disconnect between the pope and many of the people, even after ten years,” Lewis writes. “It isn’t only affecting those who are openly rebellious or critical of him, either. I’ve seen many express that they think he’s well-intentioned, but sense that he is naive, out-of-touch, or is listening to bad advisors.”

After sending out hundreds of thousands of words over six years explaining the grandeur of the pontificate, Lewis is frustrated that somehow it is not getting through. So, it is time to start all over again, because surely a second time through will convince the recalcitrant.

The Holy Father’s responsible critics are not unaware of the beauty of Evangelii gaudium. They simply don’t see its evangelizing urgency reflected, for example, in the synodal process on synodality for a synodal Church. (Early on when Pope Francis was elected, I would quote him in my homilies in a very positive way, pointed out his Italian humor, sarcasm and tongue-in-cheek comments quite common in my Italian culture. I held adult religious education classes on Evangelii gaudium as well as Laudatio si. But more and more, I was beginning to be tested by this pope’s off-the-cuff reflections and inconsistencies or ambiguities that I could not explain nor the popesplainers could explain and these have occurred throughout his papacy. For example he laments the clericalizing of the laity and clericalism in general, yet so much of the novel things in breach of even the post-Vatican II Church are from what I believe to be the very core of negative clericalism with this pope’s mind and heart. For example, he approved changing the biblical words of the Italian language “Our Father”. He promotes blessing of couples in a sexual union outside of the Sacrament of Marriage or whatever gender or sexual lifestyle knowing quite well that this begins a process of sacramentalizing these unions eventually and probably quite quickly. It appears too that women will be ordained deacons all the while having said himself that this isn’t possible. No wonder left leaning heterodox Catholics and right leaning heterodox Catholics are angry, confused and fed up!)

Pope Francis during his “white flag” interview on Italian television

Recall that in 2013 George Weigel wrote fulsomely in the Wall Street Journal that Evangelii gaudium is “a clarion call ^[10] for a decisive shift in the Catholic Church’s self-understanding. . .the great historical transition from institutional-maintenance Catholicism to the Church of the New Evangelization.”

This week Weigel returned to those pages with an excoriating assessment of the “white flag” approach^[11] of Pope Francis to international relations. The problem that frustrates Lewis and others is not that people are not paying enough attention, but rather too much. So Lewis concluded last month ^[2] that ill will – and worse – must be the problem.

“The damage done by the people in the indietrist movement is real, but no individual can stop it,” wrote an exasperated Lewis. “The only way they’ll ever change is if they respond to the promptings of the Holy Spirit in their hearts. The painful truth is that we can’t dialogue with the devil. And much of the opposition to the teaching of Pope Francis is straight from the bowels of hell. . . .And I have finally discerned that it’s time for me to say, in the words of Fr. Jacques Hamel, ‘Go away, Satan.’” (I read what Mike Lewis wrote in this regard and I think the core of his “fed upness” while masked by his anger at “backwardist Catholics” is really at its core he too is fed up with the pope and the anger and confusion he has created!” The pope is not a psychologist or sociologist or a weatherman. He should not pontificate on these things although he is free to have his opinions  and opinions these are and should be kept to himself.)

That eruption is uncharacteristic of Lewis. Of course there is no shortage of ill will to be found in the angrier corners of the internet. But that is not where the problem lies. The question that African and Ukrainian and Dutch and Asian (and American) bishops have is not Where Peter Is – Francis is Peter in Rome – but where the Peter of Evangelii gaudium went.

It is impossible to imagine that eleven years into John Paul’s pontificate anyone would seriously think it time to begin again to figure out the pontificate. John Paul did not face an angry internet, but he did face hundreds of leading theologians signing the Cologne Declaration, ^[12] including leading figures such as Fathers Eduard Schillebeeckx, Johann Baptist Metz, Hans Küng, Norbert Greinacher, Ottmar Fuchs, and Bernard Häring. The January 1989 declaration was a pointed vote of non-confidence in the pope.

John Paul did not go back to the beginning. He got on with the task at hand. Later that year European Communism was vanquished; three years later the Catechism was published and in 1993 Veritatis splendor was issued.

Another prominent Francis interpreter is Michael Sean Winters of the National Catholic Reporter, who published an anniversary reflection this week entitled, “Our Wonderful Pope is Horribly Wrong about Ukraine ^[13],” which lumped the Holy Father in with Neville Chamberlain in his approach to hostile powers.

“The Christian witness [of the Ukrainian Catholic bishops] ought not be discounted or disrupted by a careless choice of words in an interview,” he wrote about Pope Francis.

Again, a remarkable statement. Pope Francis has been speaking ceaselessly about Ukraine for more than two years. Since the initial invasion in 2014, it has been the most significant foreign policy crisis of this century. To get that “horribly wrong” after all this time is a rather damning indictment from a friend. And to be “careless” about such a grave matter leads Winters to advise the Holy Father to give “far fewer interviews.”

Thus, the eleventh anniversary arrives with some disquiet among those most devoted to the Holy Father’s program. Despite his frustrations, Lewis vows to carry on. I will continue to read WPI to great profit. (I read Lewis too, I recommend that he make his posts less detailed and shorter like Pope Francis suggests priests keep their homilies brief and to the point!)

Fr. Raymond J. de Souza is a Canadian priest, Catholic commentator, and Senior Fellow at Cardus.

WHEREIN I DISAGREE WITH THE NEW LITURGICAL MOVEMENT’S ARTICLE ON “LITURGY WARS”

 

Wednesday, March 13, 2024

The Root of the “Liturgical War”: Guest Essay by Mr Kevin Tierney

GREGORY DIPIPPO

In the article, somewhat long, that I link above, I found myself disagreeing although not entirely. I am not going to quote the article, so read it first and then you will understand my comments below.

What did not cause the Liturgies wars?

1. I was a teenager very enthralled by what was happening in my parish in Augusta around 1966 or so. We may have been late with some of the new things coming our way, but not that late. My sense of things was that the vast majority of the laity liked the 1964/65 revision of the 1962 Missal that allowed for a great deal of vernacular but maintained Latin for the Roman Canon and many other prayers, usually the quiet prayers of the priest. The Roman Canon remained in a low voice.

2. I think most people did not mind the Mass facing the congregation.

3. I think most people accepted the new Lectionary although the revision of the calendar threw out the baby with the bath water. Removing saints from the calendar made it appear that these people were not saints and never existed. I can remember seeing in a secular newspaper a priest carrying out St. Christopher from his church because he had been removed from the calendar! That annoyed people.

4. Even the 1970 Missal, basically what we have now, but it too experiencing reform in the 2011 Missal, was accepted by most practicing Catholics. 

What caused the Liturgies wars? 

1. It was the iconoclasm of important devotional elements of Catholics, the peek of which was the stripping and “wreckovation” of entire church buildings, the iconoclasm of beautiful altars and art work and the reorientation of parish churches all of which cannot be found in any official Roman document or in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal

2. I can remember around 1971 or 72 in my parish church walking into the church for Sunday Mass and seeing the old altar pulled away from the wall and stripped of its six majestically tall candlesticks, the tabernacle moved to a side altar underneath our Blessed Mother’s statue and the priest’s chair now moved to the position of the tabernacle behind the free standing altar and higher!

3. Then communion was received standing, kneeling not allowed and altar railings removed. That was not well accepted by the laity quite capable of kneeling.

4. Then Communion Ministers became the norm.

5. Then receiving Holy Communion in the hand which quickly evolved into irreverence in receiving and all of this came about all by 1975 or 1976.

6. Then things started to be sloppy. No altar clothes, beautiful statuary replaced by cheesy banners and clutter galore in the sanctuary to include the choir or folk group and instrumentation and everything else the music ministry needed. 

7. Then priests started to improvise the words of prayer, some parts of the Mass to include the Gloria and Agnus Dei not to mention the Sanctus and Creed when sung used different wording from what was in the Roman Missal—similar, dissimilar and different than the official English translation of the Mass. These were improvised.

8. Catering to various language groups in the Church and in particular parishes disunited parishes and Balkanized parishes according to language groups and Latin no longer was the unifying factor of the Mass in terms of language. Everyone wanted/wants their own language and style of worship.

9. Inculturation was never well received except by those who like creating an inculturated Mass. 

10. Casualness, banal and pedantic hymns and irreverence reigned and was disdained by most. This has led to the loss of awe, reverence, mysticism and experiencing the liturgy in a non pedantic way. 

These last 10 things are more serious than the Roman Missal itself and its reforms. 

WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

 Most recent renovation/refurbishment:

Pre-Vatican II look:

This is the Cathedral in Lafayette, Indiana. It has been renovated as one can see. Overall, the renovation is attractive, so what’s wrong with it?

1. The damnable placing of the altar in the sanctuary some six steps LOWER than the bishop’s throne. That damnable throne is six steps higher from the altar and some nine steps higher from the floor of the nave. It’s the elevation of the bishop over the altar which represents Christ and the saints in heaven. That’s damnable. 

2. The altar, the most important liturgical “item” in any church is in a lesser position than the placement of the bishop’s throne. In the photo above not only is it lower, but then it is obscured by flowers, plants and material cloth! Yes, you read that correctly. The decorators at the cathedral somehow thought hiding the altar with plants, flowers and material was a good idea! Are the flowers prettier than the new free-standing altar? Is that why these are placed there?????

3. My recommendation is to place the altar where the bishop’s throne is. Lower the bishops throne to the altar’s current location but to the side and hide it with flowers, plants and material cloth!

4. To the far left of the sanctuary, please note the clutter of damnable stuff associated with the music ministry, to include an organ console, piano and God only knows what other stuff! And I am sure, that there is a spacious choir loft in the traditional location where all that crap could be and out of sight! Who thought doing this was a good idea? Are they intentionally trying to drive me crazy?????

5. Please note where the tabernacle is, to the far right of the Bishop’s throne. That let’s you know what they think of the Most Blessed Sacrament—relegate it to an obscure position so that stupid Catholics won’t be distracted by the “active and static” real presence of Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity Who has two natures, human and divine. Yes, let’s make a distinction between the “active and static” Real Presence. Stupid Catholics would happily be informed about that!

I can’t find what this cathedral looked like prior to this latest renovation, but I suspect it was ordered properly and more stunningly beautiful, at least the sanctuary!