Terrible and beautiful at the same time? This is ugly at Savannah's Cathedral Basilica this past Sunday?
Jesuit Scholastic David Inczauskis, SJ makes silly comments on the liturgy. Of course he's not a priest yet nor a Jesuit liturgist, which is an oxymoron. Nonetheless this Jesuit Scholastic tweeted this:
Liturgy should not be beautiful.
At the Last Supper, Jesus washed stinky feet.
In the Garden, Jesus sweat blood.
At the cross, Jesus was violently murdered.
Upon rising, Jesus still had open wounds.
No, liturgy should not be beautiful. It should be ugly & scandalous.
My astute comments:
First, good for Scholastic David, SJ! At least he is not promoting the Ordinary Form as a "Happy Meal" with guitar, tambourine and happy, clappy music. He wants ugly, painful, sorrowful, tragic, gory, smelly and not nice smelly, liturgy. That's a step forward from the happy clappy happy meal liturgy no?
But the problem is that as a so-called liturgist, which he isn't nor a priest, he is a fundamentalist stuck in the period of the actual events leading to Christ's Godawful execution. He is stuck in historical fact and not what follows the resurrection, ascension and sending of the Holy Spirit, a foretaste of the Glorified Christ's return at the end of time for the Second Coming and Consummation.
What the good Jesuit desires is the crucifixion celebrated without the resurrection. I would suggest leaving that to Spanish popular piety. The good Jesuit is a liturgical fundamentalist. He forgets that liturgy is symbolic and not either/or but both/and. It is about the crucifixion but also about the resurrection. There are hints of suffering but seen through the lens of glory, heavenly glory.
Liturgical fundamentalists want an authentic reenactment, like in a play or movie, of what happened to Jesus and liturgy that reflects movies and plays. It is not enough to symbolically sprinkle the congregation with Holy Water, the priest or bishop has to go through the entire church and make sure that each and every person gets drenched with Holy Water.
At the foot washing debacle each year, fundamentalists insist that each and every person's foot or feet should be washed by each and every person in attendance.
Bread and Wine has to look like bread and wine, broken and poured.
The EF Mass captures both the crucifixion and glorification of Christ symbolized and made real in the liturgy. But it isn't ugly and it isn't happy clappy. It is the heavenly liturgy to which our crucified and risen Lord calls us, the kingdom of God with all the trappings of majesty. No one wants to be stuck in "ugly" for an eternity unless they aspire to be in hell.
The good thing is that Jesuit Scholastic David would despise this hymn which I hope we all do:
This shows ugly and beautiful together:
Jesuit Scholastic David Inczauskis, SJ makes silly comments on the liturgy. Of course he's not a priest yet nor a Jesuit liturgist, which is an oxymoron. Nonetheless this Jesuit Scholastic tweeted this:
Liturgy should not be beautiful.
At the Last Supper, Jesus washed stinky feet.
In the Garden, Jesus sweat blood.
At the cross, Jesus was violently murdered.
Upon rising, Jesus still had open wounds.
No, liturgy should not be beautiful. It should be ugly & scandalous.
My astute comments:
First, good for Scholastic David, SJ! At least he is not promoting the Ordinary Form as a "Happy Meal" with guitar, tambourine and happy, clappy music. He wants ugly, painful, sorrowful, tragic, gory, smelly and not nice smelly, liturgy. That's a step forward from the happy clappy happy meal liturgy no?
But the problem is that as a so-called liturgist, which he isn't nor a priest, he is a fundamentalist stuck in the period of the actual events leading to Christ's Godawful execution. He is stuck in historical fact and not what follows the resurrection, ascension and sending of the Holy Spirit, a foretaste of the Glorified Christ's return at the end of time for the Second Coming and Consummation.
What the good Jesuit desires is the crucifixion celebrated without the resurrection. I would suggest leaving that to Spanish popular piety. The good Jesuit is a liturgical fundamentalist. He forgets that liturgy is symbolic and not either/or but both/and. It is about the crucifixion but also about the resurrection. There are hints of suffering but seen through the lens of glory, heavenly glory.
Liturgical fundamentalists want an authentic reenactment, like in a play or movie, of what happened to Jesus and liturgy that reflects movies and plays. It is not enough to symbolically sprinkle the congregation with Holy Water, the priest or bishop has to go through the entire church and make sure that each and every person gets drenched with Holy Water.
At the foot washing debacle each year, fundamentalists insist that each and every person's foot or feet should be washed by each and every person in attendance.
Bread and Wine has to look like bread and wine, broken and poured.
The EF Mass captures both the crucifixion and glorification of Christ symbolized and made real in the liturgy. But it isn't ugly and it isn't happy clappy. It is the heavenly liturgy to which our crucified and risen Lord calls us, the kingdom of God with all the trappings of majesty. No one wants to be stuck in "ugly" for an eternity unless they aspire to be in hell.
The good thing is that Jesuit Scholastic David would despise this hymn which I hope we all do:
This shows ugly and beautiful together:
10 comments:
Some people have trouble with words. “Terrible” and “awful” come to mind. Christ overcame ugliness with a beautiful act that is not in the eye of the beholder. It looks like Fr Incubus is too smart by half.
I don't know what to say that wouldn't repeat what you have already expressed...well. The attached illustrates your points effectively:
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-C7ygaqZgjlk/UpFLUKn3KEI/AAAAAAAAJDg/3TWi3HbvBE4/s1600/Mass+(75).jpg
And, yes, I too despise that hymn. When sung, it adds a significant amount of cringe to what is already cringeworthy.
Table of Plenty has, for me, always conjured up images of happy little gnomes in an enchanted forest gathering food for wayward children in one of those knock-off Disney movies you always saw in the bargain VHS bin back in the 90s.
Well the Novus Ordo is generally pretty ugly, perhaps that's why attendance at Sunday Mass has fallen off dramatically since the Council.
When I was a little boy I was fortunate to attend Mass at a gorgeous gothic style Church. Although I was too young to understand what was taking place at the altar, I was fascinated by the beauty of the Church and the glorious Gregorian Chant and Polyphony. If I was that age today, I would be bored out of my mind
I don’t think the Mass should be,shouldn’t be, or wannabe anything. The Mass either is or isn’t .
RCG, you have me laughing out loud!(Do you think there are any bats in the belfry?)
I'm curious, Does Fr I prefer the crucifix or the cross with the risen Lord near the altar of the Church? Usually, ugly NO types prefer the latter, but that seems to fly in the face of Fr I's statement. Just wondering.
Even before I got three paragraphs in, this struck me: "Fr. Inczauskis, the 1970s called and it wants its bad movie scripts back."
Goodness gracious. If you're gonna post a hit piece, please, for the sake of truth and its God, take the three seconds to google your target. David is not a priest. David is not a liturgist. Clearly you have a personal vendetta against Jesuit liturgies, albeit one which may in fact be justified, but one must always be especially careful when one finds data that seems to support one's vendettas. Please correct. Thank you.
His title and position is repaired. Thanks for alerting us to his proper identity.
He's a Jesuit. I'm shocked I tell you! Simply...yawn...shoc.............
Post a Comment