Many people find this off-putting, the manner of consecration, not the aging priest, but him too. Why would this cause Catholics to get rid of a priest in their parish who did this?
Just as an aside, this photo was posed and there is no wine in the chalice. Interestingly enough, though, the chalice I am using is the chalice I used most frequently when I was at the Cathedral form 1985 to mid 1991. It belongs to the Cathedral and there were a few others that I used too, but this was my favorite, apart from my own chalice which I felt was too modern for this setting. Those who set up for the EF Mass consistently give this chalice although they don't know this was "my" chalice of choice way back when I never thought I'd be posing a picture like this in the cathedral.
To repeat myself, they are ill formed in the Faith and liturgical morons. I know priests and bishops who fit that category. Father McDonald, you grew up, why can't they?
An attractive chasuble too, allows you to see more of the alb (which is almost completely hidden with today's modern chasubles) and the chasuble looks easier to manuever with your hands---is that a Gothic one. One thing that looks a little odd is having the old high altar in the background, but I guess the way it is today, not possible to celebrate on that (certainly would have to move the chairs in front of it!)
I remember attending an Anglican service years ago in Virginia and the priest wore a Gothic chasuble like in the picture, but what was stunning was that it has been retrieved from Chicago, where I guess in an attempt back in the 1960s to "Get with the times", a lot of the old chasubles were unceremoniously dumped!
The "fiddleback" style Fr. McDonald is wearing was thought by St. Charles Borromeo to be a break with tradition.
"The chasuble, derived from the Latin word for “a little house” had been for centuries an ample garment. In the 15th and 16th centuries, there had been significant divergence from this Tradition, however, resulting in a form of chasuble that wasn’t ample, but cut right back so that it comprised a sort of narrow pendant, front and back, on the wearer. We know this form of chasuble as the “Roman” or “fiddleback” chasuble, and some claim that this is the form of the chasuble that is truly “traditional”. But Borromeo didn’t think that: he thought it represented a break with Tradition. And he specified the minimum size to which he expected chasubles to conform. They were to be at least 51 inches (130cm) wide and, at the back, they were to reach down almost to the heels of the wearer."
"These latter modifications [But the more significant modification to the chasuble was that the angle of the shoulder line was decreased. This measure substantially changed the way the chasuble sat on the celebrant, so that it no longer wrapped around him in folds, like the ancient Roman toga, but instead rested on him somewhat like the modern-day Mexican “poncho.] ”(beginning in Northern Europe in the 15th century), went beyond what was needed to make the chasuble more practical for the celebrant to wear. In the 16th century, Saint Charles, objecting to these extreme modifications, laid down his regulations to remind priests and vestment-makers of the importance of preserving the centuries-old Tradition. It was obviously regarded by S. Charles as most important that the chasuble continue to be a garment that fully covered the celebrant, being both long (reaching almost to the heels) and wide (51 inches, between the elbow and the wrist)."
Is seeing more of the alb a good or necessary thing?
They have been told for decades that "pre-Vatican II" Roman liturgical practices constitute old-fashioned, poor liturgy. The old ways turn the Faithful into silent spectators during Mass.
There also is the problem that the overwhelming amount of Catholics who had grown up in the "old Church" don't want any part of the "old" liturgical ways.
If that is a "fiddleback" style, where is the fiddle? Based on the photo it appears to be a Roman style chasuble.
MT,
Why don't you talk about something you know about, like that cocaine fueled, gay sex orgy at the Vatican. Come on, I know you want to tell us what "Super" Pope has done about it.
FYI, I was around before the liturgical "deforms" and I can state I no longer want any part of the "new" liturgical ways. And there are many of us. For those who truly care about the Faith and the Church, your statement could not be any falser but that won't stop you from posting your unvarnished opinions.
Now, now, why not start focusing on the really important stuff like these new "sins against the environment" which news outlets are reporting that Francis spoke of again?
Many of these news reports also remind readers that contrary to the horrible effects of sexual sins like broken marriages, abortions, Church scandals, loss of faith, and on and on, they are in reality "little" "below the belt" sins that are not very important according to his holiness.
With regards to these new "sins against the environment" I feel I must publically confess to many sins of omission-i.e. omitting to recycle that plastic bottle and newspaper, and to rarely engaging in the sin of the commission of littering.
I am most fearful though that I may be committing some new "sin of emission" from my car exhaust.
Fathers, is there an examination of conscience for these horrific new offenses against Gaia? I mean God.
The rules for a limerick are fairly simple: •They are five lines long. •Lines 1, 2, and 5 rhyme with one another. •Lines 3 and 4 rhyme with each other. •They have a distinctive rhythm (anapaestic) •They are usually funny.
The alb and the chasuble are the basic vestments for the Mass. Seeing more of alb makes it easier to appreciate that. But we're battling over small potatoes compared to other weighty issues today.
Anonymous, So foul and so petty. With critiques He's willing and ready. But if you ask for the facts To back up his claims, He leaves cause he can't justify.
So-called Anonymous might be able to regurgitate the rules for a limerick, but cannot come up with one of his own, since he is devoid of any sense of humour.
My own effort, to whit,
Sacerdos cui nomen est Kavanaugh Invenit se olim in taberna. Vinum requisivit Sed nil acquisivit, Dicens 'turbat me lingua Latina!'
is hardly brilliant, and the stresses in Latin words are difficult to reconcile with an English metrical scheme, although limericks do admit of a certain 'sprung rhythm' which does not count every syllable. But it makes a cogent point in what I hope is a humorous way.
There was a young man from Japan Whose poetry never would scan. When someone asked why, He replied 'Because I Always try to get as many words in the last line as I possibly can.'
This blog is getting a bit po-faced. To add some light relief, I would suggest a clerihew competition. A clerihew consists of four lines in rhyming couplets, but lines do not have to be of equal length; in fact it can be wittier if they aren't.
Martin Luther King was not a king He did not have horses, a crown, or anything. He preached a lot and had a dream Of everybody eating ice-cream.
"The alb and the chasuble are the basic vestments for the Mass."
"As regards the use of the alb, the practice has varied from age to age. Until the middle of the twelfth century the alb was the vestment which all clerics wore when exercising their functions, and Rupert of Deutz mentions that, on great festivals, both in his own monastery and at Cluny, not only those who officiated in the sanctuary, but all the monks in their stalls wore albs. The alb was also worn at this period in all religious functions, e.g. in taking Communion to the sick, or when assisting at a synod. Since the twelfth century, however, the cotta or surplice has gradually been substituted for the alb in the case of all clerics save those in greater orders, i.e. subdeacon, deacon, priest, and bishop. At present the alb is little used outside the time of Mass. At all other functions it is permissible for priests to wear a surplice.
"Called in Latin casula planeta or pænula, and in early Gallic sources amphibalus, the principal and most conspicuous Mass vestment, covering all the rest."
Higatique-Pigatique Josephine Bonaparte Said my short husband's too big for his pants. Characteristically, egomaniacally, counter-productively Cozening France.
Or, of Limerick style, the award winning:
The bustard's an exquisite fowl With minimal reason to growl. He escapes what would be Illegitimacy By grace of a fortunate vowel.
Anonymous Mark Thomas said... "One reason as to why Catholics object..."
I would say this is a reason why some Catholics object, by no means do all object.
About 40 minutes from my home is a shrine where, on a daily basis, midday novus ordo mass is celebrated ad orientem. Somehow, the people aren't in shock, don't recoil in disgust, there aren't primer materials available and explanations aren't provided prior to the start of mass. Remarkably, it is a well attended mass where numbers swell, particularly during lent.
"There also is the problem that the overwhelming amount of Catholics who had grown up in the "old Church" don't want any part of the "old" liturgical ways."
Mark - I believe that you are correct. At this juncture, probably a majority percentage of Catholics have been formed in the new mass, myself included. As I get older, however, I and many like me find that we need more than what is provided at your average novus ordo mass. While the Eucharist provides much needed nourishment, I find it increasingly tedious waiting for the Liturgy of the Eucharist to commence. My roots drew me back to the East however, I'm most frustrated when I come back to the West outside of an EF mass or, Novus Ordo celebrated Ad Orientem. Ad Orientem changes everything. It seems almost impossible to approach mass in the usual mundane way when it is so oriented. The people seem more settled and reverent as well in a church setting that is traditionally ordered and reverent.
It sounds like you were brought up in the OF, unlike me, who was brought up on the EF. I think you should know that Faithful Catholics brought up on the EF did NOT have a problem with it, that is left-wing loon propaganda spouted by priests and laity invested in the massive failure that is the OF.
I gave over 40 years of service in music ministry (part-time) to the OF and I have finally walked away from it and tolerate it only when forced to. Your senses almost have to be non-existent to prefer the OF over a properly celebrated EF.
Yes, I was brought up in the OF (the '70s) and experienced the brunt of that era. I also remember those who were dismayed because of the changes and, in addition, saw magnificent churches being gutted - absolutely gutted - to comply more with fashion then reality. My grandmother's parish somehow almost made it to 1980 still saying mass on the high altar (then only 10 years old after the church was rebuilt because of a fire). That altar is still treasured and occasionally used to this day.
I too am involved with music ministry cantoring at my Byzantine parish. I struggle, personally, to see how anyone could put OF sacred music on any sort of equal footing with chant, Eastern or, Western.
As I mentioned, the OF celebrated ad orientem is a game-changer. To me and, excluding the contemporary hymns, the demeanor of everyone at such liturgies, clergy and laity alike, is different being more reserved and focused. Would you be inclined to agree this? I've often thought that while I prefer the EF, had the OF been implemented ad orientem, the liturgy wars of the last 50 years probably could have in large part been avoided.
I agree that ad orientem is a game changer, but selfish, vain, priests would not get their satisfaction then.
I once saw the OF in the vernacular celebrated ad orientem and was stunned at how much more sacred the experience seemed. But again, Father Entertainer would be devastated because it is all about him. It really is a sublime act of humility to celebrate Mass ad orientem.
I like the clerihew contest. But it is harder than I thought. For rhyming words is harder to be than it ought. English has tricky rules to make the writer be humble. Whereas Latin and German let you pile the words in a jumble.
I don't know how old Mark Thomas is. Sometimes he sounds like a precocious adolescent who delights in cutting and pasting quotations he has found on-line which he thinks bolster his arguments, yet falls into the yawning trap of false equivalence. His Manichean contraposition of 'right-wingers' and 'left-wingers' is also an adolescent trait; everything has to be categorized. It's an unsubtle form of Hegelian dialectic.
Yet his near-heretical papolatry suggests an older person; adolescents tend to be more sceptical of authority.
Had he been around at the time of the liturgical revolution of 1964 to 1969, which continued into the 1970s and in fact inevitably spawned a counter-revolution, he would have noticed, as I did, the following.
Some people loved it. Many who did were ladies of 'a certain age', stalwarts of the parish, who went on to resist anything which might have harked back to the pre-Conciliar forms.
Others disliked it to a greater or lesser extent. Yet they were not against change as such; they had lived through the Second World War and were living in a decade of great social change. They also had been brought up to trust the Church and to take obligation seriously. But by 1970 many were saying 'they have thrown out the baby with the bathwater'.
Most were quite simply confused and bemused. Bishops constantly were reassuring them on the lines of 'You have had to put up with a lot of change. But things have now settled down and there will not be many changes in the future'. This was before Communion in the hand, EMHC and female servers.
I think he is young and, I am afraid, brittle. His dedication to Pope Francis can’t endure contact with air. I hope he comes to love the Pope as a man of clay as well as the office as succesor to Peter.
37 comments:
Just as an aside, this photo was posed and there is no wine in the chalice. Interestingly enough, though, the chalice I am using is the chalice I used most frequently when I was at the Cathedral form 1985 to mid 1991. It belongs to the Cathedral and there were a few others that I used too, but this was my favorite, apart from my own chalice which I felt was too modern for this setting. Those who set up for the EF Mass consistently give this chalice although they don't know this was "my" chalice of choice way back when I never thought I'd be posing a picture like this in the cathedral.
Because it is not longer about them in their closed circle.
The Roman Rite, celebrated according to its rubrics. What's not to like?
To repeat myself, they are ill formed in the Faith and liturgical morons. I know priests and bishops who fit that category. Father McDonald, you grew up, why can't they?
Beautiful! Those attending and assisting are very fortunate.
An attractive chasuble too, allows you to see more of the alb (which is almost completely hidden with today's modern chasubles) and the chasuble looks easier to manuever with your hands---is that a Gothic one. One thing that looks a little odd is having the old high altar in the background, but I guess the way it is today, not possible to celebrate on that (certainly would have to move the chairs in front of it!)
I remember attending an Anglican service years ago in Virginia and the priest wore a Gothic chasuble like in the picture, but what was stunning was that it has been retrieved from Chicago, where I guess in an attempt back in the 1960s to "Get with the times", a lot of the old chasubles were unceremoniously dumped!
Is there a reason behind why the priest rests his elbows on the altar as the words of institution are spoken?
Anonymous again focuses on the most important aspect of the blog post.
The chasuble looks more Roman than Gothic. Nonetheless beautiful.
Dan,
That's because Anonymous "You Know Who" is brilliant, a genius, a funster, just ask him!
The "fiddleback" style Fr. McDonald is wearing was thought by St. Charles Borromeo to be a break with tradition.
"The chasuble, derived from the Latin word for “a little house” had been for centuries an ample garment. In the 15th and 16th centuries, there had been significant divergence from this Tradition, however, resulting in a form of chasuble that wasn’t ample, but cut right back so that it comprised a sort of narrow pendant, front and back, on the wearer. We know this form of chasuble as the “Roman” or “fiddleback” chasuble, and some claim that this is the form of the chasuble that is truly “traditional”. But Borromeo didn’t think that: he thought it represented a break with Tradition. And he specified the minimum size to which he expected chasubles to conform. They were to be at least 51 inches (130cm) wide and, at the back, they were to reach down almost to the heels of the wearer."
"These latter modifications [But the more significant modification to the chasuble was that the angle of the shoulder line was decreased. This measure substantially changed the way the chasuble sat on the celebrant, so that it no longer wrapped around him in folds, like the ancient Roman toga, but instead rested on him somewhat like the modern-day Mexican “poncho.] ”(beginning in Northern Europe in the 15th century), went beyond what was needed to make the chasuble more practical for the celebrant to wear. In the 16th century, Saint Charles, objecting to these extreme modifications, laid down his regulations to remind priests and vestment-makers of the importance of preserving the centuries-old Tradition. It was obviously regarded by S. Charles as most important that the chasuble continue to be a garment that fully covered the celebrant, being both long (reaching almost to the heels) and wide (51 inches, between the elbow and the wrist)."
Is seeing more of the alb a good or necessary thing?
One reason as to why Catholics object...
They have been told for decades that "pre-Vatican II" Roman liturgical practices constitute old-fashioned, poor liturgy. The old ways turn the Faithful into silent spectators during Mass.
There also is the problem that the overwhelming amount of Catholics who had grown up in the "old Church" don't want any part of the "old" liturgical ways.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
If that is a "fiddleback" style, where is the fiddle? Based on the photo it appears to be a Roman style chasuble.
MT,
Why don't you talk about something you know about, like that cocaine fueled, gay sex orgy at the Vatican. Come on, I know you want to tell us what "Super" Pope has done about it.
FYI, I was around before the liturgical "deforms" and I can state I no longer want any part of the "new" liturgical ways. And there are many of us. For those who truly care about the Faith and the Church, your statement could not be any falser but that won't stop you from posting your unvarnished opinions.
Anonymous again imparts
His wisdom, right from the start;
His knowledge and wit
He’s sure will impress,
And cause all to say “how smart!”
Now, now, why not start focusing on the really important stuff like these new "sins against the environment" which news outlets are reporting that Francis spoke of again?
Many of these news reports also remind readers that contrary to the horrible effects of sexual sins like broken marriages, abortions, Church scandals, loss of faith, and on and on, they are in reality "little" "below the belt" sins that are not very important according to his holiness.
With regards to these new "sins against the environment" I feel I must publically confess to many sins of omission-i.e. omitting to recycle that plastic bottle and newspaper, and to rarely engaging in the sin of the commission of littering.
I am most fearful though that I may be committing some new "sin of emission" from my car exhaust.
Fathers, is there an examination of conscience for these horrific new offenses against Gaia? I mean God.
Dan,
You nailed it. The media essentially serves as the propaganda arm of the Abortion Party
Oh, dear. Seems a tutorial is in order here:
The rules for a limerick are fairly simple:
•They are five lines long.
•Lines 1, 2, and 5 rhyme with one another.
•Lines 3 and 4 rhyme with each other.
•They have a distinctive rhythm (anapaestic)
•They are usually funny.
Anonymous again imparts
His wisdom, right from the start;
His knowledge and wit
He’s sure will impress,
And cause all to say “how smart!”
"Is seeing more of the alb a good thing?"
The alb and the chasuble are the basic vestments for the Mass. Seeing more of alb makes it easier to appreciate that. But we're battling over small potatoes compared to other weighty issues today.
Anonymous,
So foul and so petty.
With critiques
He's willing and ready.
But if you ask for the facts
To back up his claims,
He leaves cause he can't justify.
Dan,
That describes Anonymous "You Know Who" to a tee!
So-called Anonymous might be able to regurgitate the rules for a limerick, but cannot come up with one of his own, since he is devoid of any sense of humour.
My own effort, to whit,
Sacerdos cui nomen est Kavanaugh
Invenit se olim in taberna.
Vinum requisivit
Sed nil acquisivit,
Dicens 'turbat me lingua Latina!'
is hardly brilliant, and the stresses in Latin words are difficult to reconcile with an English metrical scheme, although limericks do admit of a certain 'sprung rhythm' which does not count every syllable. But it makes a cogent point in what I hope is a humorous way.
There was a young man from Japan
Whose poetry never would scan.
When someone asked why,
He replied 'Because I
Always try to get as many words in the last line as I possibly can.'
This blog is getting a bit po-faced. To add some light relief, I would suggest a clerihew competition. A clerihew consists of four lines in rhyming couplets, but lines do not have to be of equal length; in fact it can be wittier if they aren't.
Martin Luther King was not a king
He did not have horses, a crown, or anything.
He preached a lot and had a dream
Of everybody eating ice-cream.
Come on chaps, have a go!
"The alb and the chasuble are the basic vestments for the Mass."
"As regards the use of the alb, the practice has varied from age to age. Until the middle of the twelfth century the alb was the vestment which all clerics wore when exercising their functions, and Rupert of Deutz mentions that, on great festivals, both in his own monastery and at Cluny, not only those who officiated in the sanctuary, but all the monks in their stalls wore albs. The alb was also worn at this period in all religious functions, e.g. in taking Communion to the sick, or when assisting at a synod. Since the twelfth century, however, the cotta or surplice has gradually been substituted for the alb in the case of all clerics save those in greater orders, i.e. subdeacon, deacon, priest, and bishop. At present the alb is little used outside the time of Mass. At all other functions it is permissible for priests to wear a surplice.
"Called in Latin casula planeta or pænula, and in early Gallic sources amphibalus, the principal and most conspicuous Mass vestment, covering all the rest."
New Advent - Catholic Encyclopedia
I prefer the Higgledy-Piggledy format m'self.
Higatique-Pigatique Josephine Bonaparte
Said my short husband's too big for his pants.
Characteristically, egomaniacally, counter-productively
Cozening France.
Or, of Limerick style, the award winning:
The bustard's an exquisite fowl
With minimal reason to growl.
He escapes what would be
Illegitimacy
By grace of a fortunate vowel.
Neither are my own compositions.
A limerick hardly describes
The distaste I hold inside;
When Anon-Kav portends
All authority on end,
And endlessly he chides.
Anonymous Mark Thomas said...
"One reason as to why Catholics object..."
I would say this is a reason why some Catholics object, by no means do all object.
About 40 minutes from my home is a shrine where, on a daily basis, midday novus ordo mass is celebrated ad orientem. Somehow, the people aren't in shock, don't recoil in disgust, there aren't primer materials available and explanations aren't provided prior to the start of mass. Remarkably, it is a well attended mass where numbers swell, particularly during lent.
"There also is the problem that the overwhelming amount of Catholics who had grown up in the "old Church" don't want any part of the "old" liturgical ways."
Mark - I believe that you are correct. At this juncture, probably a majority percentage of Catholics have been formed in the new mass, myself included. As I get older, however, I and many like me find that we need more than what is provided at your average novus ordo mass. While the Eucharist provides much needed nourishment, I find it increasingly tedious waiting for the Liturgy of the Eucharist to commence. My roots drew me back to the East however, I'm most frustrated when I come back to the West outside of an EF mass or, Novus Ordo celebrated Ad Orientem. Ad Orientem changes everything. It seems almost impossible to approach mass in the usual mundane way when it is so oriented. The people seem more settled and reverent as well in a church setting that is traditionally ordered and reverent.
Anonymous at 3:29, now that's a classic.
ByzRC,
It sounds like you were brought up in the OF, unlike me, who was brought up on the EF. I think you should know that Faithful Catholics brought up on the EF did NOT have a problem with it, that is left-wing loon propaganda spouted by priests and laity invested in the massive failure that is the OF.
I gave over 40 years of service in music ministry (part-time) to the OF and I have finally walked away from it and tolerate it only when forced to. Your senses almost have to be non-existent to prefer the OF over a properly celebrated EF.
TJM -
Yes, I was brought up in the OF (the '70s) and experienced the brunt of that era. I also remember those who were dismayed because of the changes and, in addition, saw magnificent churches being gutted - absolutely gutted - to comply more with fashion then reality. My grandmother's parish somehow almost made it to 1980 still saying mass on the high altar (then only 10 years old after the church was rebuilt because of a fire). That altar is still treasured and occasionally used to this day.
I too am involved with music ministry cantoring at my Byzantine parish. I struggle, personally, to see how anyone could put OF sacred music on any sort of equal footing with chant, Eastern or, Western.
As I mentioned, the OF celebrated ad orientem is a game-changer. To me and, excluding the contemporary hymns, the demeanor of everyone at such liturgies, clergy and laity alike, is different being more reserved and focused. Would you be inclined to agree this? I've often thought that while I prefer the EF, had the OF been implemented ad orientem, the liturgy wars of the last 50 years probably could have in large part been avoided.
ByzRC,
I agree that ad orientem is a game changer, but selfish, vain, priests would not get their satisfaction then.
I once saw the OF in the vernacular celebrated ad orientem and was stunned at how much more sacred the experience seemed. But again, Father Entertainer would be devastated because it is all about him. It really is a sublime act of humility to celebrate Mass ad orientem.
I like the clerihew contest. But it is harder than I thought.
For rhyming words is harder to be than it ought.
English has tricky rules to make the writer be humble.
Whereas Latin and German let you pile the words in a jumble.
'Gather us in',
An occasion of sin.
It compels me to run for
The door.
Oh, now I think I understand.
You try to keep it from being bland.
But what is the trait of the perfect verse?
Terse.
Old Thomas Tallis
Bore no man any malice;
Save an organist called Ken
Who played his music rather badly now and then.
Thomas and Ken,
Being good Christian men,
Salved their musical chafe
With the help of Ralph.
I don't know how old Mark Thomas is. Sometimes he sounds like a precocious adolescent who delights in cutting and pasting quotations he has found on-line which he thinks bolster his arguments, yet falls into the yawning trap of false equivalence. His Manichean contraposition of 'right-wingers' and 'left-wingers' is also an adolescent trait; everything has to be categorized. It's an unsubtle form of Hegelian dialectic.
Yet his near-heretical papolatry suggests an older person; adolescents tend to be more sceptical of authority.
Had he been around at the time of the liturgical revolution of 1964 to 1969, which continued into the 1970s and in fact inevitably spawned a counter-revolution, he would have noticed, as I did, the following.
Some people loved it. Many who did were ladies of 'a certain age', stalwarts of the parish, who went on to resist anything which might have harked back to the pre-Conciliar forms.
Others disliked it to a greater or lesser extent. Yet they were not against change as such; they had lived through the Second World War and were living in a decade of great social change. They also had been brought up to trust the Church and to take obligation seriously. But by 1970 many were saying 'they have thrown out the baby with the bathwater'.
Most were quite simply confused and bemused. Bishops constantly were reassuring them on the lines of 'You have had to put up with a lot of change. But things have now settled down and there will not be many changes in the future'. This was before Communion in the hand, EMHC and female servers.
I think he is young and, I am afraid, brittle. His dedication to Pope Francis can’t endure contact with air. I hope he comes to love the Pope as a man of clay as well as the office as succesor to Peter.
Post a Comment