EVEN BLAH CAN BE MADE TO LOOK REGAL

This is my sister Mary Elizabeth's wedding to my brother-in-law Bob Smith on July 9, 1966 at St. Joseph Church in Augusta. Please note the new altar placed in front of the old for the Tridentine Mass facing the people, but note how the old altar is still majestic looking in its Tridentine decor. What's interesting about the new altar is that its legs are longer on the front to straddle the three steps to the old altar and the priest still stands facing the people on the same level as the old altar. Later the old altar was pulled away from the wall, lowered one step and placed on the edge of the second step and stripped down and the tabernacle placed on Mary's side altar and the celebrant's chair directly behind the altar--it all became truly blah!

Let's face it, most parishes cannot build Gothic or Romanesque churches. Most have to build simple buildings. In the past, prior to Vatican II, these simple structures were still rather elegant because the parishes followed strict guidelines for the sanctuary.

For example, the parish in which I grew up, St. Joseph Church in Augusta, was a typical low ceiling, A frame building. It was cheaply constructed but had exposed painted wooden ceiling beams in the A frame style.

What made it warm and attractive and very conducive for Mass and private prayer were the following norms at the time that the pastor followed in building the church.

1. The sanctuary was up one step from the nave, but the altar was up an additional three steps to accommodate the movements of the Tridentine Mass. Although the altar was an extremely simple marble structure, it was placed against the back wall and had the traditional six tall candlesticks for high Mass and two smaller ones for low Mass.

Above the crucifix and altar was a "corona" which had lights in it, but made the ceiling above the altar look different from the rest of the ceiling. It was not a work of art, but served a liturgical purpose and I believe that in pre-Vatican II times every altar was to have some kind of canopy/corona, even if very abbreviated, above the altar of sacrifice.

They used very nice altar clothes that hung slightly over the mensa and were very attractive but differed when changed.

2. There was a very nice, large crucifix on the back wall above the crucifix and a very lovely drape, in a red color, custom made for the wall and the crucifix.

3. There was a very simple altar railing and two side altars, one for Saint Joseph and the child Jesus to the right and to the left was the Blessed Virgin Mary's altar. Each side had votive candles.

That was it, the stain glass windows were simply colored glass and quite cheap at that, but I love that little old church, which has since be replaced with a more modern one and it turned into a social hall. In fact, I made my First Confession, First Holy Communion, Confirmation in that old Church, my sister was married there and I had my first Mass there and my father's funeral was there.

Here is another church, much more elegant than the one I describe from my childhood which undergoes a transformation.

Here is the before look toward the sanctuary:

Here are two after looks:

MORE FROM THE CARDINAL PREFECT FOR THE CONGREGATION OF DIVINE WORSHIP

The National Catholic Register is reporting more of what Cardinal Antonio Canizares, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, said when he made this statement on Jan. 15 in response to questions from reporters after he delivered an address on the Second Vatican Council at the Spanish Embassy to the Holy See.


The following are excerpts from the National Catholic Register's article:

Cardinal Canizares later spoke with a reduced number of reporters and further amplified his remarks about the Lefebvrists and the Paul VI Missal.

He elaborated on the idea that if the schismatic archbishop had seen the new Mass celebrated properly and reverently he might not have rejected it.

“Even the followers of the Society of St. Pius X, founded by Archbishop Lefebvre, when they participate in a Mass that is properly celebrated, say, ‘If things were this way everywhere, there would have been no need for what happened and for what really caused this separation,'” he said.

Liturgical Continuity

The cardinal went on to explain that Vatican II offered more than simply changes.

“It offers a vision of the liturgy in continuity with the entire Tradition of the Church and the theological reflection it makes about the liturgy,” he said. “The changes are a consequence of this theological reflection within ecclesial Tradition.”

To show that the liturgy should not be a cause for division, Pope Benedict XVI published the motu proprio Summorum Pontificum in 2007 to establish universal use of the 1962 missal.

The Holy Father has taken several other steps towards reconciliation with the Society of St. Pius X.

On Jan. 21, 2009, he lifted the excommunications imposed on the four bishops ordained by Lefebvre in 1988, including Bernard Fellay.

In doing so, however, he stressed that they should give “full recognition to the Second Vatican Council,” as well as to the magisteriums of the popes after Pius XII, as a condition for full communion.

In addition, Pope Benedict XVI gave the society the chance to end the separation in 2011 by accepting a "doctrinal preamble."

In 2012, the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei,” charged with the ongoing dialogue with the Society of St. Pius X, announced that the society had requested “addition time for reflection and study” of the proposed preamble.

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/cardinal-if-lefebvre-had-seen-proper-mass-he-might-not-have-split/#ixzz2Io4Pgo5S

SING A NEW CHURCH INTO BEING (THE HORIZONTAL GONE BEZERK?) IS THERE A SPECIFIC HERESY FOR THE WORDS OF THIS SONG AND ITS THEOLOGY?

UPDATE! Speaking of extremely poor hymns for Mass such as the one below, Kathleen Pluth of the Chant Cafe has an excellent article on traditional and not so traditional hymns that are quite excellent for the celebration of the Mass. You can read her article at the Adoremus Bulletin by pressing here!

A commenter on another post described the following hymn which they sung in his parish this past Sunday in the following way: "Sing a New Church was perhaps the most offensive and perverted hymn possible."

I've never heard this song sung at Mass; In fact I don't think I've ever heard it. I like the traditional melody but don't care for it set to instrumentation apart from organ for church use.

But the words! Egads! It is the horizontal, all about us, triumphant congregationalism that really grates the soul! There is very little about God in this song, its all about us doing this, that and the other and making Utopia here on earth by our own efforts. I think there is a name for this heresy, in terms of we doing for ourselves what only God can do for us and by His love and grace. It is what He and the Church give to us that make us who we are, not through our own pitiful efforts.

There are only two references to the Deity, "Summoned by God and Gathered in the name of Jesus" which are declarative sentences. This hymn's words ask nothing of Jesus but glorify us and all that we are worth.

Could you imagine singing this immediately after "Lord, I am not worthy" and said three times? Would there be a disconnect between what the Liturgy actually gives us and what this song says. It's theology is upside down and should never be sung at Mass. I don't think it should even be sung at a popular devotion extolling the qualities of mankind, I mean, humankind.

Sing a New Church (sung to “Nettleton,” the melody for “Come, Thou Fount of Every Blessing”)

~Delores Dufner, OSB

Summoned by the God who made us
rich in our diversity
Gathered in the name of Jesus,
richer still in unity.

Refrain: Let us bring the gifts that differ
and, in splendid, varied ways,
sing a new church into being,
one in faith and love and praise.

Radiant risen from the water,
robed in holiness and light,
male and female in God’s image,
male and female, God’s delight.

Refrain

Trust the goodness of creation;
trust the Spirit strong within.
Dare to dream the vision promised,
sprung from seed of what has been.

Refrain

Bring the hopes of every nation;
bring the art of every race.
Weave a song of peace and justice;
let it sound through time and space.

Refrain

Draw together at one table,
all the human family;
shape a circle ever wider
and a people ever free

© Oregon Catholic Press

I THINK I SAW THIS COMING, CLAIRVOYANT THAT I AM!

This is a "High Mass" Lutheran Eucharist:

MY COMMENTS FIRST: There is actual talk about a Lutheran Ordinariate similar to the one for the Anglicans. It would bring Lutherans who request it back into the full communion of the Catholic Church, i.e. union with the Vicar of Christ and the bishops in union with him, which is essential to the nature of the true Church.

They would be able to keep some of their spirituality and liturgy but it would have to be brought into line with Catholicism.

I've always felt that true Christian unity can only come about in the way that our Holy Father, Pope Benedict is making it happen. We remain as Catholic as always and allow them to adjust their expression of Christianity and make it conform to us in all that is essential while retaining that which is good in their own tradition of prayer and spirituality. Let's see how this works out! It is very exciting and shows that Pope Benedict is a genius when it comes to the Church, liturgy, governance and ecumenism.

From the Vatican Insider and written by Alessandro Speciale
vatican city

The Secretary of the International Lutheran Federation has rejected the proposal presented again about a day or so ago by the Prefect of the former Holy Office

An ordinariate for Lutherans who wish to re-enter into communion with the Vatican, whilst preserving their traditions at least partially? The idea of extending the solution offered by Pope Benedict XVI to groups of traditionalist Anglicans to followers of Martin Luther was suggested for the first time by the President of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, Cardinal Kurt Koch.

But just as the proposal is being put forward again by the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Mgr. Gerhard Ludwig Müller, it is beginning to trigger heated protests and concerns among the Catholic Church’s ecumenical partners –as happened with the Anglican Church.

The creation of an ordinariate – intended for those groups of Anglicans that wish to join the Catholic Church but also maintain their own identity – was “not Rome’s idea; it originates in the Anglican Church,” Koch said last 30 October. “The Holy Father looked for a solution and found a wide-reaching one which took into account the Anglican Church’s ecclesial and liturgical traditions. If the Lutherans made a similar request - he went on to say - we will have to consider their situation carefully. But the initiative remains in the hands of the Lutherans.”

The issue was recently addressed by Mgr. Müller. The German theologian chosen by Pope Benedict XVI to lead the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, recognised that the “Lutheran world is different to the Anglican one because Anglicanism has always had an element that is closer to Catholicism.” But this would not stop the Church from allowing Lutheran groups to convert to Catholicism, preserving “legitimate traditions developed” over the centuries.

According to Mgr. Müller, there are Lutherans in his homeland, Germany, who hope to enter once again into communion with the Roman Catholic Church and who believe that the changes introduced by the Second Vatican Council were an adequate response to Luther’s request for reforms five centuries ago. “Protestants – he added – do not oppose Catholicism because they have hung onto many Catholic traditions.”

However, the idea of establishing a Lutheran ordinariate was turned down by the Secretary General of the International Lutheran Federation which has approximately 70 million Christian Lutheran members. The Rev. Martin Junge said individual believers naturally still have every right to convert, but the establishment of an ordinariate would not only pose “theological problems” it would also have “serious ecumenical repercussions.”

Protestant Churches are preparing to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the 2017 Reform and have invited the Catholic Church to take part in the celebrations. But - Junge said - the creation of an ordinariate “would send out the wrong signal to Lutheran Churches which are preparing to celebrate the anniversary of the Reform in a spirit of understanding and ecumenical cooperation.” This is why Müller’s message to the “small number” of Lutherans who wish to convert to Catholicism has triggered “a great deal of concern.”

UNHOLY DISSENT AND CAUSING FURTHER DISUNITY TO THE CHURCH

Of the two polar groups representing dissent from Vatican II and the Holy See and the Holy Father in particular, in my most humble opinion, the ultra liberal, heterodox left is more sinister than the ultra conservative, ultra orthodox right when it comes to the corruption of the Church's faith, morals and unity.

In the Church today there are many people on both the left and the right who think they have a mission to make things right with the Church according to their own agendas.

For example, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre is a dead hero to many and his community of the Fraternity of St. Pius X is a living sign of prophecy to the whole Church. The fact that the Vatican and the Pope have censured them, suspended their priests and excommunicated their bishops, but now lifted, it is fro them a a badge of courage being so bold as to buck Vatican II and the Holy See and the Holy Father.

On the progressive side of things, there are priests and religious who are challenging the Vatican and the pope about many things, such as the "pelvic" issues of ordination of women, marriage of homosexuals, use of artificial birth control and so on and so on.

There are a few heroes for the progressive side, like the now laicized former Maryknoll priest, Roy Bourgeois, living in Columbus Georgia and others like him.

What do these two groups have in common. They are neo-gnostics in the sense that they think their decision of conscience gives them an inside track that the authorities of the Church don't have, especially the pope and the bishops in union with him.

They also do something else that is very serious. They wound the unity of the Church and further fragment her.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again, in times like ours the best thing for any Roman Catholic is to follow the Holy Father and the bishops in union with him in the areas of faith and morals, or more specifically, Scripture, Tradition, Natural Law and Canon Law.

If you follow anyone else who teaches or suggests teachings in the areas of faith and morals that is contrary to the Tradition of the Church, then you've become a neo-Protestant IMO!

Fortunately the Holy See has a way of dealing with dissent and sometimes in the most patient ways. But make no mistake about it, the Holy See is the boundary keeper when it comes to dissent and heterodoxy. The Holy Father excommunicated the bishops of SSPX, but did not laicize them and by his charity he also lifted their excommunications.

Not so for Roy Bourgeois. He was dismissed from the Maryknoll Order mandated by the Holy See; He was excommunicated and now the Holy Father has laicized him.

It doesn't get more serious than that!

A QUESTION OF THE VALIDITY OF BAPTISM, ESPECIALLY AS IT CONCERNS THE RECEPTION OF CHRISTIANS BAPTIZED IN PROTESTANT COMMUNIONS

I've been on vacation for the past week at my mom's town home in Augusta (now my own, but it will always be her home as long as I keep it). This morning I went to Mass early and came home and am cooking my Sunday dinner and doing so in quite a relaxing way. I feel like I'm home with my parents and yes, I think they are here!

It is bright and sunny, clear skies and about 55 degrees on its way to the 60's. Early in the week it was 80 and oh so glorious!

But I digress. I'm watching a live broadcast on a local station in Augusta of Trinity on the Hill United Methodist Church, right next door to St. Mary on the Hill Catholic Church. They are perhaps the largest and richest Methodist Church in Augusta and have had their Sunday morning service televised on the same local station each Sunday for at least 50 years or more. They know how to do it and spend quite a bit to be able to do it and their tailor their service not only to the congregation present, but to the TV audience also.

The Methodists in Augusta are a part of the North Georgia Convocation and tend to be more Baptist (low church) in worship and liturgical design than high church or Episcopal. In Macon, though, they belong to the South Georgia District and are a bit more high church in worship both in style and liturgical design.

But again I digress. This morning's worship service included a baptism of an infant.
This church is quite folksy but stays somewhat within the Methodist tradition of worship but with a great deal of flexibility.

There were two ministers perform the baptism. Each took various parts. There was an extremely contemporary renunciation of sin and profession of faith prior to the baptism.

Then this is what I want others to chime in on and it concerns the validity of the baptism.

Then one minister dipped his hand in the water and slightly got it wet and then placed the palm of his hand on the head of the child and then said the following formula and I quote directly from what he said:

"We baptize you in the Name of God the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit."

So in terms of validity, did he use enough "flowing water" and was the slight change in the words of the baptism formula enough to invalidate this baptism?

The reason I ask is that in the RCIA we accept the baptism of Protestants. But we are really clueless about the quirks of congregationalism and the liberties that Protestant ministers take with the words of baptism even if their congregation has words that are like ours but the minister changes on his own.

Should we go back to conditional baptism of all Protestants being received into the full Communion of the Catholic Church? After watching this I'm leaning in that direction.

CATHOLIC PROGRESSIVES ARE SHAKING IN THEIR BOOTS AND RABIDLY ANGRY AT THE HOLY FATHER AND THE ASCENDANCY OF THE REFORM OF THE REFORM IN CONTINUITY! THUS WE KNOW WE ARE ON THE RIGHT TRACK! GOD IS GOOD!

While still in the early stages, the Holy Father's "reform of the reform within continuity" movement is becoming like a locomotive charging forward from this papacy and bringing renewal to the entire Latin Rite of the Roman Church.

This is particularly a threat to those who thought history would be on their side; that the so-called "spirit" of Vatican II would win the day not only beginning with the Liturgy celebrated in a dumbed down, congregationalist, parochial way, with make it up as you go liturgics and the showmanship of priests and congregations stuck on themselves and all about themselves (clericalism and laityism), but also in the areas of doctrine and morality.

In this scenario, which could never have succeeded in the true Church, since the gates of hell will never prevail, Jesus is seen as just one more good man amongst many others of other religions or no religions and that in these other religions salvation is achievable through them and their "gods" not just through Jesus Christ.

In this corrupt vision of Jesus and His Church, secular morality is viewed as spirit filled replacing traditional Catholic morality based upon Scripture, Tradition and Natural Law. Yes, there are Catholics, especially academics, proposing such nonsense for the church and political cliques in the Church trying mightily hard to sway the day toward this corrupt morality by leading others into this kind of heretical thinking. This so called "new morality" is the old fashioned immorality. We've always had immoral Catholics, but at least they knew that what the Church taught in the areas of faith and morals was infallible and a guide to help them to know the truth, and if their lives lacked, then by God's grace they could experience a metanoia (change of heart) and repent of their immorality and through sacramental penance experience forgiveness and reconciliation and that there would be no limit to the offering of this forgiveness and reconciliation with the one caveat that one was sincerely sorry for one's sin and was striving to seek God's grace to purify them of the works of sin and eternal damnation.

So, what our Holy Father models for us and what the Prefect for the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Antonio Cañizares is hoping to overcome slowly but surely is the manner in which in many places throughout the world the liturgy is celebrated, not by saying the black and doing the red, but by doing one's own thing in the most banal and dull, boring way and then adding the superficial veneer of "showmanship" to make the boring interesting by using entertainment types of antics to spruce things up.

But what really strikes fear into those stuck in the '70's are the following comments from Cardinal Antonio Cañizares which leave in no oblique way where we are going as a Church:

He stressed the need of the notion of mystery, and particulars such as the altar facing East and the fact that the sacrificial sense of the Eucharist must not be lost.

(And this is the true bombshell that scares the beegeebees out of progressives stuck in the 70's): When it comes to the liturgy, he says some of the changes that were called on by the Second Vatican Council, are still pending. But if those changes are applied correctly, he says, even traditionalists groups, like that of Lefebvrians, would not feel mistrust.

The progressives are shaking in their boots and rabidly angry! God is good!

LANCE ARMSTRONG IS FAR FROM THE ONLY DISORDERED HUMAN BEING IN THE WORLD, HE JUST LOVES THE LIME LIGHT THAT BATHES HIM IN HIS GLORIOUS DISORDERS AND DISORDERED LIFE--BUT IF YOU WANT TO BE POLITICALLY CORRECT ACCORDING TO TODAY'S SECULAR SPIRITUALITY, DON'T USE THE WORD "DISORDERED" TO DESCRIBE ANYONE OR YOU WILL BE CENSURED!

Face to face confession with the high priestess of the "religion of being spiritual but not religious" Mother Oprah Winfrey. Now all is well with Lance and the world and he's gotten his "wicked web he's weaved his whole adult "lie" off his chest. Doesn't it make you feel good?

"Oh what a wicked [tangled] web we weave when first we practice to deceive."

Reality shows are the in-thing in television entertainment. They are cheap to make and cheapen us human beings by exploiting our faults and turning us into fodder for voyeuristic entertainment.

Oprah Winfrey has perfected her new "religion" of being spiritual but not religious which is a "universal" sort of religion for all people, kind of like what the Unitarians have tried but failed to accomplish.

Being spiritual can be interpreted in any way one wishes and justifies just about any kind of behavior except "intolerance" for sin. If we Catholics and other Christians say love the sinner but hate the sin, that would be offensive to a "spiritual" person who believes that the sin is what the person is because the person does this, that or the other.

Yet Oprah has also perfected her "sacrament" of "confession" by eliminating the need for God's forgiveness and the need to be reconciled and forgiven by the Church (her members) who have been scandalized and given poor example by the grievous sins of her members especially those of a public nature, what we once called "public sinners."

So the "sacrament" of "confession" we see on shows like Oprah's and Jerry Springer's are actually not signs of seeking forgiveness but braggadocio.

It is therapeutic for the person to go public and on national TV not only for their few moments of fame or infamy but also to make them feel good that they've gotten it out in the open.

True sacramental confession by a repentant sinners is usually accomplished privately within the context of the "seal of confession" and one acknowledges to God and the priest who represents the Church the need for forgiveness from God and the Church in order to be reconciled to both.

Public reconciliation is usually reserved to sins that lead to public excommunication which while the sins are more prolific today, the use of public excommunication is very rare.

So what do we make of Lance Armstrong? Is he the poster boy for do-it-yourself spirituality and religion where public and private morality are determined by what one gets out of one's sin or lifestyle? Where is God and Church in his life?

The Catholic Church knows that Lance Armstrong is far from being alone in his sin. We are all in the same boat, some more seriously "disordered" than others, but all of us are disordered to some extent by the original sin of Adam and Eve that we have all inherited save the Blessed Virgin Mary.

The Church is thus for people like Lance Armstrong who through the Church and her Savior Jesus Christ and His sacraments seek God's sanctifying and actual grace.

We find our only hope from the escape of the "disorderedness" of our lives in Jesus and the gifts of faith, hope and love that God offers us and the grace He gives us to rise above our disorders and to live ordered lives according to Scripture, Tradition and Natural Law.

Confession without repentance is bragging. Was Lance bragging? Pray for Lance and all sinners and "if not for the grace of God so go I."

CHURCH MUSIC ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA REFORM OF THE REFORM OF THE ORDINARY FORM OF THE MASS AT SAINT JOSEPH CHURCH IN MACON, GEORGIA! WOULD CARDINAL ANTONIO CANIZARES HOLD THIS UP AS A MODEL OF ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTING SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM IN THE NEAR FUTURE? I REPORT; YOU DECIDE!

Cardinal Antonio Cañizares, Prefect, Congregation for Divine Worship, stated that the Council did not speak of the priest celebrating Mass facing the people, that it stressed the importance of Christ on the altar, reflected in Benedict XVI's celebration of the Mass in the Sistine Chapel facing the altar. This does not exclude the priest facing the people, in particular during the reading of the word of God. He stressed the need of the notion of mystery, and particulars such as the altar facing East and the fact that the sacrificial sense of the Eucharist must not be lost.


Spanish Cardinal Antonio Cañizares also said recently that when it comes to the liturgy, some of the changes that were called on by the Second Vatican Council, are still pending. But if those changes are applied correctly, he says, even traditionalists groups, like that of Lefebvrians, would not feel mistrust.

This is the closing Mass at Saint Joseph Catholic Church, Macon, Georgia for The Church Music Association of America's, Winter Chant Intensive that concluded last Friday!


This is about a twelve minute video of the rehearsal for the Mass:

BOMBSHELL: I AM CLAIRVOYANT, AFTER ALL, WHEN IT COMES TO THE REFORM OF THE REFORM OF THE ORDINARY FORM OF THE MASS AND WHAT IS IN STORE FOR THE FUTURE

Vatican preparing guide for priests on how to celebrate Mass

Cardinal Antonio Cañizares, Prefect, Congregation for Divine Worship, confirmed this Tuesday at an address at the Spanish Embassy to the Holy See on “Catholic Liturgy since Vatican II: Continuity and Evolution.”The Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments is preparing a booklet to help priests celebrate the Mass properly and the faithful to participate better, according to the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments.

This is Spanish Cardinal Antonio Cañizares. When it comes to the liturgy, he says some of the changes that were called on by the Second Vatican Council, are still pending. But if those changes are applied correctly, he says, even traditionalists groups, like that of Lefebvrians, would not feel mistrust.


BOMBSHELL:Cardinal Antonio Cañizares added that the Council did not speak of the priest celebrating Mass facing the people, that it stressed the importance of Christ on the altar, reflected in Benedict XVI's celebration of the Mass in the Sistine Chapel facing the altar. This does not exclude the priest facing the people, in particular during the reading of the word of God. He stressed the need of the notion of mystery, and particulars such as the altar facing East and the fact that the sacrificial sense of the Eucharist must not be lost.

THE REVERENCE AT MASS THAT CAN BE RECOVERED AND OH SO SIMPLY!

This is a follow up to Deacon Greg Kendra's change of heart concerning kneeling for Holy Communion and altar railings. I think every congregation in the world where standing for Holy Communion and receiving in the hand is the norm has experienced the major reasons why this is a liturgical idea gone wrong. People have lost a sense of the sacred and this took place with the dumbing down of the sense of reverence by not celebrating the Ordinary Form of the Mass as it was intended, with the same reverence as the Extraordinary Form. Simply bringing back kneeling for Holy Communion and receiving Holy Communion on the tongue, combined with ad orientem for the Liturgy of the Eucharist and a better grade of sacred music and chant, will help greatly in the return of a more traditional reverence and piety for Holy Communion.

Yesterday, Father Jay Finelli posted his experience with the return of an altar railing and more and more people choosing to kneel to receive Holy Communion in his parish once the railing was reinstalled. You can read "My Experience of the Altar Railing" in full by pressing these two sentences.

He recalls why Pope Benedict XVI has been distributing Holy Communion to people as they kneel and receive Holy Communion on the tongue:

During Mass at St. John Lateran, on May 22, 2008, Pope Benedict XVI began giving Communion to all who received from him kneeling and on the tongue. His master of Ceremonies, Monsignor Guido Marini stated that Communion kneeling and on the tongue helps to emphasize “the truth of the Real Presence (of Christ) in the Eucharist, helps the devotion of the faithful, and introduces the sense of mystery more easily.” Since that Mass, the practice has become the norm at all Papal Masses.

At the Cathedral in New Orleans and I believe at St. Patrick's Cathedral, I've seen ushers or security people standing near those who distribute Holy Communion who's primary job is to make sure the communicant receives Holy Communion and does not walk off with it.

While this extreme practice is laudable, wouldn't it be more laudable to just insist that people kneel and receive on the tongue.

Will this prevent all abuse? No! Even in the pre-Vatican II Church there were stories of satanists stealing the host during Mass for their untoward sacrilege and of small children, not properly catechized, taking the host out of their mouth and bringing it home. There is even one report of a child who had done this quite frequently and eventually flushed all the hosts she had taken home down the toilet.

But this was very rare and the shock and disgust of those in the Catholic community who learned of it was palpable. Today these kinds of abuses are so common place in so many parishes that people simply shrug their shoulders either apathetic about it or recognizing that the Church has brought this on herself by allowing Holy Communion in the hand while standing. They feel powerless in the face of this kind of sacrilege since the Church herself won't do what is necessary to protect the sanctity of Holy Communion and restore traditional reverence and piety during Mass and specifically in the manner in which Holy Communion is received in the Latin Rite.

BRING BACK KNEELING FOR HOLY COMMUNION

Our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI has proposed in the most symbolic way possible that kneeling for Holy Communion is 100% better than standing to receive. At each and every Mass he celebrates, communicants approach the Holy Father and kneel in adoration for the One they receive in Holy Communion, our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, who incarnate of the Blessed Virgin Mary became Man, but remained the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, but with two natures at the incarnation, human and divine, thus we call the Blessed Ever Virgin Mary, the "Theotokas" or Mother of God.

Kneeling to receive Holy Communion in the Latin Rite goes back more than 1200 years, so it is an established tradition and in terms of that tradition, standing to receive in the Latin Rite is novel and an aberration of a particularly corrupt point in Church history.

In the Latin Rite the reasons that liturgists gave after Vatican II (not the Council Fathers themselves during Vatican II) was entirely under the "spirit" of Vatican II to "clericalize the laity, beginning with Mass." In other words a novel "ecclesiology" purportedly taught by Vatican II meant that the distinctions between the "common priesthood" of all the baptized and the "ministerial priesthood" or the ordained priest had to be erased, minimized and diminished so that the priesthood of the baptized could emerge and eclipse the ordained priesthood.

These same liturgists, desired a low Church and low Christology expression of the liturgy built upon the ordinary and banal rather than the extraordinary and beautiful. So to promote this, there are no distinctions in the priesthood, altar railings were removed and described as barriers to the laity's full, conscious and active participation in the Liturgy. Like the clergy, the laity should stand and take the Eucharist because of their equal status and that it is more adult to do so. And the laity, like the priest, should distribute Holy Communion to express their ministry in the Church and the other forms of ministry they would take in the life of the parish in general. Full, conscious and active participation went from what the laity does in the pews, to what they should be doing at the altar, in terms of reading and distributing Holy Communion.

While all of these would be considered the "re-imagining of the Catholic Church" and its deconstruction of pre-Vatican II doctrine, dogma and theology to accomplish these goals and thus make us closer to our Protestant brothers and sisters and thus bring about organic unity in the Church, there were other results of this theology gone viral that has had a deleterious effect on the life of the Church, her faith, morals and discipline and respect and awe for the Second Person of the Most Holy Trinity, in fact for the Most Holy Trinity Himself.

Deacon Greg Kendra has written an article on bring back the altar railing and why he has had a change of mind. What he describes I have witnessed Sunday after Sunday. You can read his entire article by pressing the sentence below. I will pick some examples he describes and describe my experience of them too.

"Communion Rails: Restoring a Sense of the Sacred Would a change of posture at Holy Communion help to sharpen our perspective, as well? By Deacon Greg Kandra, January 14, 2013" Communion Rails: Restoring a Sense of the Sacred
Would a change of posture at Holy Communion help to sharpen our perspective, as well?
By Deacon Greg Kandra, January 14, 2013

My comments on the deacons examples:

"I've watched a mother receive communion, her toddler in tow, then take it back to the pew and share it with him like a cookie." I have seen this many times, and with either parent breaking off a piece to give to an older child not prepared yet for Holy Communion simply because the child said they wanted some! Others have reported this to me too, as they witnessed it from the congregation!


"At least four or five times a year, I have to stop someone who just takes the host and wanders away with it and ask them to consume it on the spot." This is common at St. Joseph Church and I would say our yearly number is much higher!

"Once or twice a month I encounter the droppers. Many are well-intentioned folks who somewhere, somehow drop the host or it slides out of their hands and Jesus tumbles to the floor." This is quite common in my parish too!

A couple times a year I get the take-out crowd. They receive the host properly, and then pull out a hanky and ask if they can take another one home to a sick relative.

"Beyond that, I'm reminded week after week that people have no uniform way to receive in the hand. There's the reverent "hands-as-throne" approach; there's the "Gimme five," one-hand-extended style; there are the notorious "body snatchers" who reach up and seize the host to pop into their mouths like an after-dinner mint; and there are the vacillating undecideds who approach with hands slightly cupped and lips parted. Where do you want it and how??" In my experience at St. Joseph Church, yes, yes, yes, ditto, ditto, ditto, to all the deacon writes!

"After experiencing this too often, in too many places, under a variety of circumstances, I've decided: it's got to stop. Catechesis is fruitless. We've tried. You can show people how it's done; you can instruct them; you can post reminders in the bulletin and give talks from the pulpit. It does no good. Again and again, there is a sizable minority of the faithful who are just clueless—or, worse, indifferent."

My Final Comment: Not all who receive standing and in the hand do so disrespectfully or cluelessly, many do so quite reverently. But why in the name of God and all that is holy did we change the method of receiving Holy Communion for the laity when it wasn't broke and there were none of the problems that the deacon describes above for the new way we've been doing it for about 40 years now?

At St. Joseph, we have written guidelines for how to receive Holy Communion in a prominent place on the back of our missalette. We catechize regularly, but regularly we find hosts discarded on the floor (as recently as Christmas Day!). We have to go after people who take the host to the pew or out of the Church, we have people who should know better, receiving with only one hand extended, grab it with two fingers and a thumb and others who don't know what to do!

The simple solution is to return to the altar railing, limit those who can be Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion and make sure people kneel and receive the Host on their tongue. It really is quite simple and I would say that in less than two years of doing this, awe and reverence would be re-established in continuity with the pre-Vatican II liturgy and ecclesiology.

As for Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, I have no issue with these in principle, but I think they should be installed acolytes and vested for this ministry. They should go through a diocesan formation program which focuses on the Liturgy of the Eucharist and the piety necessary and that their primary ministry is to assist the priest in bringing Holy Communion to the sick and homebound and the necessary pastoral skills for this.

I am not opposed to women being included in this ministry.

We don't need hundreds of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, just enough to assist at Mass and every Sunday if need be and to bring Holy Communion more frequently (every week) to those who are homebound. Let's face it a priest can hardly get to all the homebound once a month or once a year!

COOL MAN COOL--STUCK IN THE '70'S, TOTALLY SPACED OUT MAN!

CARMA, THE MAIN CHARACTER IN THE COMMERCIAL BELOW, IS STUCK IN THE 70'S CLOTHES, ART, MUSIC, AND TECHNOLOGY AND THE MOST TOTALLY COOL, MAN, LITURGY!

I saw this commercial this morning and thought to myself, "Self what is it about my generation where so many of us indeed are stuck in the 70's in terms of clothes, art, music, technology, hair and most sadly of all liturgy, that even commercials are making caricatures of us?"

Another way to say, "stuck in the 70's" is "arrested development." Perhaps it is the haze of the lingering weed, or the LSD that made the trip permanent or just plain nostalgia when one was, man, truly hip, but now, we are fodder for caricature, aren't we, I mean, man, really! This is sad, man, really sad! :-(

The truly sad thing, though, is that those who never experienced the 70's have an affinity for it and its liturgy, a small but vocal group. However,those who are like Carma in the commercial below,my age group, man, really are stuck in the 70's. Usually they are the famous liturgists of that period who successfully deconstructed the liturgy and got the multitudes, including bishops, to drink their spiked COOL Aid. And some are still hung over on that spiked COOL Aid and don't really know that it is 2013 and the spirit of Vatican II is but a hazy chapter in a dusty history book for most. Listen to the young operator with web.com who smiles at the man stuck in the 70's and her response to him.

At any rate enjoy and just substitute the stuck in the 70's clergy and laity you know in terms of liturgy and Church and smile, man, smile:

LET THEM GO IF THEY CANNOT ACCEPT JESUS AND HIS MORAL DEMANDS

Should we grieve when someone leaves the Church? Of course, because in doing so the graces God wants to give them and which by His grace they are able to receive (not take) is for them and their salvation. So a Catholic's departure from the full communion of the Church is a sign that that person really doesn't want to be oriented toward God's grace or reception of it as God intends.

Some people of course depart the Church out of anger at someone who has hurt or abuse them in despicable ways or others simply a loss of faith. In a sense there is a bit of integrity related to these kinds of decisions.

But then there are those who completely disagree with the Church's stance on particular moral issues, what is called pejoratively, the pelvic issues. Those in the homosexual political movement take great exception toward the Church and her embrace of Divine Law found in Scripture, Tradition and Natural Law. They wish to rewrite Scripture through re-interpretation based upon cultural changes, but they can't contend or deal with either Tradition or Natural Law as these thwart their efforts.

So many Catholics who have same sex attractions are angry at Church leaders who say that the homosexual orientation is disordered (not to be confused with sinful) and that any sex outside of marriage between one man and one woman and recognized by the Church is considered sinful.

So we see many homosexuals leaving the Church, becoming totally secular or joining Protestant communions such as the Episcopal Church which has no prohibitions against sin.

Jesus of course never stops anyone from departing from His company and these people in His public ministry departed precisely because they did not like the truths He taught and the implications of His miracles and the necessity to eat His Body and Drink His Blood for their salvation. He let them go. Did he stew over it? Evidently not since this is not reported in the Scriptures.

A BRIEF VIDEO FROM THE MACON TELEGRAPH ON FRIDAY'S CMAA WINTER CHANT INTENSIVE, THE FULL VIDEO WILL BE POSTED LATER THIS WEEK

PRESS HERE FOR THE MACON TELEGRAPH'S BRIEF, ROUGH CUT VIDEO BY LIZ FABIAN, OF THE CHURCH MUSIC ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA WINTER CHANT INTENSIVE SOLEMN SUNG MASS IN THE ORDINARY FORM ON FRIDAY, JANUARY 11, 2013 AT SAINT JOSEPH CATHOLIC CHURCH.

I think the video we shot will capture sights and sounds much better (from the choir loft). That will be posted later this week.

THE CONCLUDING MASS OF CHRISTMASTIDE AT THE VATICAN, CHIRPING BABIES BEING BAPTIZED AND AD ORIENTEM WITH HYBRID OF ITALIAN AND LATIN

The way it was done today as in the other years the Holy Father has celebrated Mass in the Sistine Chapel. Oh! the glory of ad orientem:

As I type this, I'm watching the "Baptism of the Lord" Holy Sacrifice of the Mass from the Sistine Chapel with His Holiness, Pope Benedict XVI. I've come late to the Mass, the Liturgy of the Eucharist had begun with the "Preparation of the Offerings."

Of course this Mass is celebrated at the historic Sistine Chapel altar and thus ad orientem. It is glorious to see this of course.

The commentator for the broadcast stated that the Holy Father would be praying Eucharistic Prayer III in Latin as "suggested" by the Second Vatican Council. "Suggested" is a weak term, I thought the Second Vatican Council mandated that Latin be the language of the Mass with the allowance of (suggestion?) some vernacular. But who wants to be a Second Vatican II Documents "fundamentalists?"

But this is the way papal Masses that are not meant for a worldwide audience are celebrated in Italy. He says or sings much of it in Italian, but beginning with the Preface Dialogue, Preface and Eucharistic Prayer, these are always in Latin.

Man! the babies are crying, but no one is flustered.

At the Our Father, the Holy Father used the introduction for it from the Rite of Baptism tying baptism into Confirmation and Holy Eucharist. I've not done that when I've had baptisms at Mass because I didn't know I should. It is good to see the Holy Father model the right way!

Then the Our Father was chanted in Italian with the Italian embolism and doxology chanted.

The Holy Father continues the Mass in Italian.

So, what does this mean in terms of the Holy Father modeling how to celebrate the Ordinary Form Mass (keep in mind he hasn't modeled the Extraordinary Form Mass, and at this point I don't think this Holy Father ever will).

As an aside the Holy Father is clearly moving more slowly these days and going up and down stairs he needs some assistance, but not much. But he still completely genuflects a heck of a lot easier than I do, my knees are killing me, so I can only do a partial decline! How sad!

My clairvoyance tells me that the anticipated official "reform of the reform of the Ordinary Form of the Mass" will be what the Holy Father has been modeling during his pontificate and these are the following that will be codified and made liturgical law:

1. The Holy Father has made no adjustment to the Order of Mass and uses all the options of the Ordinary Form Roman Missal--so this will remain, including the options in the Introductory Rite of the Ordinary Form.

2. The manner of celebrating other sacraments during Mass will remain as in the rubrics of the Ordinary Form, including Baptism and Holy Matrimony and at the time after the homily, although for the Rite of Marriage I foresee something of that rite being done in place of the Penitential Act.

3. The Benedictine Altar arrangement will be written into the General Instruction and it will make clear that it must be used for Masses facing the congregation and that Ad Orientem is perfectly lawful at any and all Masses with the faithful.

4. The preservation of Latin for the entire Mass will certainly be allowed as it currently is, but will be mandated for the Preface Dialogue, Preface and Eucharistic Prayer and all the Eucharistic Prayers will remain.

5. Holy Communion will be distributed to communicants kneeling, including deacons and laity and this will be the norm. Standing will be the exception.

6. Gregorian Chant or Polyphony will be the norm for the sung parts of the Mass, with the sung Mass mandating the use of the propers, that is, the Introit, Offertory and Communion Antiphons as well as the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Agnus Dei. However this would not preclude the great works of artists for special occasions.

7. The use of other anthems as filler and of a variety of styles in harmony with the Church's sense of Sacred Music will be allowed.

8. The Gradual and/or Tract will be allowed as an option to replace the Responsorial Psalm and Gospel Acclamation.

There is very little wrong with the Ordinary Form of the Mass when celebrated by the book, using Gregorian Chant or Sacred Music that is a derivative of it, and doing it completely including the Introit, Offertory and Communion Antiphons, using the Benedictine Altar Arrangement and returning to ad orientem for the Liturgy of the Eucharist and kneeling for Holy Communion.

No radical adjustment need to be made to it when done in this fashion. When I post our Church Music Association of America Solemn Sung Mass in the Ordinary Form, you will see what I mean. It too is a hybrid of Latin and English and very similar to the Holy Father's Baptism of the Lord Mass this morning.

AFTER A LONG, FIERCELY COLD WINTER, SPRING IS FINALLY HERE! THANK GOD. IT'S 80 DEGREES DOWNTOWN, MACON AS I TYPE THIS ON SATURDAY, JANUARY 12 AT 1:40 PM, EST

During the Church Music Association of America's Winter Chant Intensive in my parish and our southern town, the weather was cloudy but mild. It started cool but warmed up to the 60's by Wednesday and Thursday and was in the 70's for Friday's Mass, but cloudy and dreary looking.

But not today! It is bright sunshine and almost 80 degrees and our air conditioner has kicked on in the church, yesterday for the Mass and already today for an empty church!

These long winters in Macon which begin around mid December take their toll on us, but thank God spring has finally arrived.

Other temps right now:

Wichita, 28

New York, 46

Los Angeles, 52

Chicago, 45

Minot, -2

Collegeville, Mn, 10

Sioux Falls, SD, 11

Baltimore, 49

London, UK, 39

THE CONTAGION OF CHANT AND GOOD LITURGY

The contagion of good chant unlike the bad contagion of the common chalice!

Just as bad liturgy is shown to be a terrible contagion spreading through the Church like a virus that can't be stopped, so virulent it is, is there such a thing as a good germ (like wheat germ) that could lead to good liturgy being caught, like a virus that is spread from person to person, pew to pew, church to church and infecting the whole Church will glorious chant and good liturgy?

On the post of spreading germs from the common chalice and the handshake of affliction, I mean, peace, which in Boston and other places has been suspended because it is so great a threat to public health, Quilisma Ignotus makes a marvelous comparison that could be used to make chant and good liturgy a good contagion and I quote him/her:

"I suspect that there was much germ-sharing in your recent close-quarter chanting event - what with people standing next to each other, breathing, chanting, expelling microbes as quickly as their melismatic little diaphragms could push air through their germ infested bronchial passages."

What a marvelous way to promote the contagion of chant. The only ones who fear this would be those in progressive circles who are fearful of this sort of "Performatism" which I think is the very definition of the word.

Yet, no one has banned gatherings of Catholics at Mass or elsewhere where by simply breathing one could catch a deadly virus. Nor has anyone be ordered to wear plastic gloves in touching door knobs and the like. But who knows, like the Japanese, we all may be soon wearing surgical masks to prevent the spread of contagion, but not for singing chant, for that might disrupt the "melismatic little diaphragms from pushing air through their germ infested bronchial passages" to a waiting world wanting to breath in the good germs of chant!

I just love blogging!

WHEN A GOODLY NUMBER OF CATHOLICS RECEIVE CERTAIN TYPES OF MUSIC AND LITURGICAL ACTIONS IN THE MOST POSITIVE AND EMBRACING WAY, SUCH AS THE VIDEO SHOWS BELOW, SHOULD WE NOT BE ALARMED?

Just because something like this might be well-received by particular Catholic congregations, does the logic follow that this is good for the Church and her liturgy? I say emphatically, "NO!" The fallacy of this logic which so many progressive liturgists have embraced is that if people like it and it keeps them in the Church then why not do this.

As well, there is little or no outrage today when these things are done compared to the 1960's and 70's when experimentation of this sort was met with skepticism by a large number of Catholics until they eventually were crock pot cooked in the toxic stew of liturgical nonsensicalness and came to accept whatever was done if it was done for good motives.

So, do you like this and if you do, I'm concerned about your Catholics spirituality and identity, your liturgical awareness and the loss of all that is of our tradition.

(Just as aside, and I know that may seem ironic to some, I actually like the design of this Cathedral and have seen it many, many years ago. I particularly like the sanctuary and the fact that in one sense it is quite traditional. there is a spaciousness in front of the altar and around it and yet the altar and ambo are elevated in the traditional manner of the pre-Vatican II rubrics and the altar does have the "Benedictine Altar Arrangment!"

LIBERAL PROTESTANTS HAVE PRETTY MUCH KILLED ECUMENISM WITH CATHOLICS AND THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCHES AND PROGRESSIVE CATHOLICS WHO HAVE JOIINED THE MENTALITY OF LIBERAL PROTESTANTS ARE NOT THE FUTURE OF ECUMENISM, CATHOLIC/ORTHODOX ECUMENISM IS THE WAVE OF THE FUTURE!

ON 31 OCTOBER 2012, METROPOLITAN HILARION OF THE EASTERN ORTHODOX CHURCH READ A LECTURE AT THE VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY, ONE OF THE OLDEST EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS IN THE USA, LOCATED NORTHWEST OF PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA. THE FOLLOWING ARE EXCERPTS FROM THAT TALK:

Metropolitan Hilarion’s lecture was dedicated to the past and present of Orthodox-Catholic dialogue. He said in the beginning: "The teaching of the holy fathers of the first millennium, when the Churches of the East and the West abided in unity, although at times this unity was subjected to serious trials, is the sure foundation upon which dialogue between Christians can develop successfully and fruitfully. It is my profound conviction that fidelity to the Christian tradition, the preservation of continuity in the teaching and life of the Church is the proper means for the restoration of unity among Christ’s disciples.

"It is because of the renunciation by some Protestant denominations, as well as parts of the Anglican communion, of the ancient Christian tradition that it has become ever more difficult for the Orthodox Church to continue co-operation with them. I regret this, but the dialogues with Protestants and Anglicans which we have had for decades are now under threat because of processes taking place in the Protestant communities of the West and North. I mean the continuing liberalization in the field of theology, ecclesiology and moral teaching. Certain denominations have legitimized the blessing of same-sex unions and the ordination of people openly declaring their non-traditional sexual orientation.

"We are obliged to speak about this because we want to preserve the good that was achieved during the years of dialogue between Orthodox on the one hand and Protestants and Anglicans on the other. In defending the two-thousand-year-old tradition of the Church, we remain true to this dialogue, yet at the same time we see that Protestants and Anglicans are growing away from us by accepting innovations which we find unacceptable.

"I am speaking of this in the walls of a Catholic university by no means because I am afraid to criticize Anglicans and Protestants to their faces. On the contrary, every time the opportunity arises, I speak openly of our concern in direct dialogue with our brothers from the Anglican and Protestant communities. Thus, for example, in 2010 at a festive dinner at the Nicaea Club in London in the presence of the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams I stated the sad fact that the ‘Orthodox and Anglican Churches are to be found on different sides of the abyss which separate Christians of a traditional direction and Christians adhering to liberal teachings’. And as recently as the day before yesterday I spoke of the same things at the old Episcopalian seminary at Nashotah House, a contemporary of your University.

"Unlike dialogue with the Protestants and Anglicans which has reached a dead end, dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church seems to have a future to it precisely because, like the Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church does not think of itself outside of Tradition and strives to teach and live in accordance with the tradition of the apostles and holy fathers. In my view, the significant improvement and strengthening of relations between our Churches that can be seen in recent years is connected to an awareness that we are united by a common heritage, thanks to which both Orthodox and Catholics can and must together bear witness to the world of the eternal values of the Gospel."

In conclusion of his address Metropolitan Hilarion underscored: "It is essential for the Orthodox and Catholics today to perceive each other not as rivals but as allies in the cause of the defense of Christians’ rights. We must develop interaction outside of the success or otherwise of theological dialogue, independent even of how relations between the Orthodox and Catholics take shape in concrete regions around the world. We must build this interaction proceeding from a common strategic task since we are dealing with the future of humanity. It is upon our joint endeavours that the future of Christianity in the third millennium will primarily depend." – Press Release, Moscow Patriarchate, Nov. 1.

ARCHDIOCESE OF BOSTON SUSPENDS LAITY'S COMMON CHALICE AND HANDSHAKE OF PEACE OUT OF FEAR OF DEADLY CONTAGION! MAY THE LIE THAT THERE IS NO DANGER IN TRANSMITTING A DEADLY CONTAGION OR AT LEAST ONE THAT WILL MAKE THE COMMUNICANT SICK BE PUT TO REST ONCE AND FOR ALL!

UPDATED, THE NBC NIGHTLY NEWS STORY ON THE FLU AND THE BOSTON ARCHDIOCESE PROHIBITING THE HANDSHAKE OF PEACE AND THE COMMON CHALICE, LISTEN TO HOW THE REPORTER DESCRIBES THE CATHOLIC PRACTICE OF DOZENS OF PEOPLE DRINKING FROM "COMMUNION WINE SERVICES!"

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

NBC NIGHTLY NEWS reported on Friday night's newscast that the Archdiocese of Boston is asking parishioners to stop shaking hands at the Sign of Peace and to bow instead. That seems like a grand solution to out of control signs of peace, doesn't it? But the reason is not liturgical, it is out of concern for health and spreading the flu virus by hand to hand combat, I mean, contact! Also since the flu, other viruses and deadly germs can be transmitted by the common chalice, the use of it is suspended. Now, I must query, who out there in progressive liturgy land (PI) and in their right mind still contends that no deadly germs and viruses can be transmitted by drinking after others? Is liturgical correctness more important than the life and health of our laity? Like those in the hierarchy and rank and file Catholics in denial of the sex abuse scandal before that was made clear by the media, especially in Boston and the scope of it, are these liturgists in complete denial too and will it take the media and lawsuits from laity who get sick and some who die from drinking from the common chalice that someone with a deadly disease has transmitted to others because that person chose to drink from that same chalice? As I've said before, if the city had to license us as it does a restaurant and saw our practice of the common chalice given to the laity, we'd be written up and ordered to stop and if we didn't we'd be shut down. Think about it. Liturgists and others in the Church of goodwill (I include myself here, from the dreary past of course) brainwashed the laity into thinking it is okay for several dozen people to drink from the same chalice all out of concern that liturgists shoved down out throats, quite literally I might add, that the Holy Eucharist is an action of "eating and drinking" and that we must provide for the laity the means by which they can do what Jesus told them to do. Of course that is a lie! Jesus told the apostles, the first priests to do it at the Last Supper. Eating and drinking should be changed to "receiving" or "partaking" in our Lord's sacrifice and in His Body, Blood,Soul and Divinity! The only sanitary way to make sure our people can receive our Lord under both forms of His Real and complete Presence is by way of intinction properly administered. Finally, some of us in the Church have asked that people who come to Mass feeling ill, should not drink from the common chalice. This in and of itself is an absurdity that most people would have heard this instruction or remembered it and that people will self-police themselves. On top of that, there are laity who think that God will protect others from such contagion as it concerns His Most Precious Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity and that it is an act of faith to drink after someone who is well or sick because God will protect you. This is how silly all this has gotten to be and how the Church throws out in reckless abandon common sense concerning abuse of people and their health!

DO I LOOK LIKE THE CAT THAT SWALLOWED THE CANARY?

This photo was taken with the altar boys right after our Reform of the Reform of the Ordinary Form of the Mass within continuity which was celebrated today at 11:00 AM and featured the Church Music Association of America singing in the most splendid way possible, Gregorian Chant for all the Propers and other parts of the Mass.

The Mass was sung in its entirety from start to finish and even the Epistle was chanted by a CMAA member and then in place of the Responsorial Psalm, the Gradual was chanted and how splendid to meditate upon it as it was. And then the Gospel was chanted flawlessly in simple tone by me and in front of these professional chanters! That takes nerves of steel!

It was a hybrid of Latin and English, Scriptures in English, homily in English, although I was tempted to give an extemporaneous Latin one! :)

The Liturgy of the Eucharist was ad orientem, but the Introductory Rite and the Concluding Rite were at the Celebrant's Chair.

We videoed it and it will take about a week to get it digitized and placed on my blog and I'm sure on the Chant Cafe Blog.

Others took photos during the Mass and as soon as I get them I'll post them.

We had a local television station videoing some of it and if they post it on their website I'll get it to mine.

It was absolutely splendid. We had about 300 people present with many driving down from Atlanta! We had our own parish school kids as well as Mt. de Sales Academy Middle School and High School kids.

I was in muted spiritual ecstasy thanks to Gregorian Chant. If we could only do it this way each and every Sunday at our principle Mass and if this was the way we celebrated the revised Tridentine Mass for the last 50 years, I think we'd still have 70 to 80% of Catholics attending Mass.

There is absolutely no way to say the the Reformed Mass has been well received when nearly 80 to 85% of Catholics absent themselves from it every Sunday.It could have been well received if celebrated as we did today not the banal, folksy way it has been done with folk music, contemporary music and now the worship and praise genre which prepares our kids for the non-denominational Protestant sects!

For those 20 to 30% who do attend, what is it they like and do they like the right stuff or the vapidity of bar room sounds or Broadway ditties that set sacred words to secular music that is foreign to the best of our Catholic tradition and with a rock concert type of "Rocky Mountain High" being sought based not on depth of character of the music and words, but a narcotic-like stimuli?

Do they like the spiked Kool Aid of contemporary sounds that jar the spirit rather than lift it to God in a meditative, contemplative way? Just wondering?

Perhaps when advertising properly sung Mass, the following logo should be used:

FOR THE BONUS PRIZE, CAN ANYONE DETECT AN UNUSUAL VESTMENT WORN FOR AN ORDINARY FORM OF THE MASS WHICH IS SELDOM IF EVER WORN BY PRIESTS TODAY IN THE ORDINARY FORM. HINT: IT IS KIND OF LIKE THE FANON IN ITS RARITY!

SAINT JOSEPH CHURCH, MACON, GEORGIA HOSTS CHURCH MUSIC ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA "CHANT INTENSIVE"

I was pleased to find on the front page of the metro section of the Macon Telegraph this morning a very nice article and large pictures on "Macon Hosts Chant Workshop" written by the Telegraph's reporter Liz Fabian (great name!) and a parishioner here at St. Joseph Church.

This is from the web version of the story which includes a video of one of the sessions!



Move over monks. Gregorian chant is not just for monasteries these days.

Melodies that pre-date the Middle Ages are becoming more mainstream in modern Catholic Masses.

This week, dozens of musicians from across the country have been studying the ancient art in a conference at St. Joseph Catholic Church in Macon.

With men and women sequestered in different buildings, instructors have been going over the basics and beyond.

“It’s challenging,” said instructor Richard Rice, a composer and music director for the Archdiocese of Washington, D.C. “The melodies do strange things.”

With its origins in the first century, chant is not metered. The familiar music staff and metered measures came a couple of centuries later.

“The problem with this music is it’s not all there on the page for you,” Rice said. “You have to have an organizational system.”

Singers at the conference are learning a rhythm technique developed in the late 19th century during another chant revival at the Abbey of Solesmes in France.

“We don’t know what it sounded like in 800,” instructor Arlene Oost-Zinner of Auburn, Ala., said. “Some don’t adhere to the method. They think it’s artificial.”

Her students made their own notations on the music to help set the rhythm.

“Don’t ever say beat with chant,” Oost-Zinner told her female students Wednesday. “It’s pulse -- (like) the beats of the heart, waves of the ocean, the flapping of angels’ wings.”

In the men’s session, Rice spent about 20 minutes working on three Latin words of a Psalm translated “Arise, shine Jerusalem.”

“We spend a lot of time figuring out the music,” Rice said.

The singers sound several notes in a singular vowel sound for just one syllable.

“Arise. We linger on that word 15 seconds,” Rice told his students of varying ages. “You’ve meditated on one word of scripture, and that’s an amazing thing.”

Chant enthusiasts say the slower pace and fewer words allow people to engulf themselves in worship.

Father Jonathan Venner, a 30-year-old priest from South Dakota, said there is a resurgence in chanting among people of the younger generation.

“Young people are looking for anything that has depth,” Venner said.

At St. Joseph, a Latin Mass is chanted the first Sunday of each month at 2 p.m. in a much simpler form than traditional Gregorian chant.

Five years ago, Pope Benedict allowed for the older form of the Mass to be celebrated with the priest facing the altar.

“I seized the opportunity,” said Father Allan McDonald, St. Joseph’s pastor.

Although the Second Vatican Council of the 1960s encouraged chanting to remain in the liturgy, the focus shifted to English hymns instead, McDonald said.

Latin was intended to remain the language of the Mass, but the council allowed for some English.

“But it almost went to all-English overnight,” McDonald said.

There was criticism that non-Latin speaking congregations were too passive in the Latin Mass and let the priest do the worship, he said.

Those who attend the voluntary Latin Mass at St. Joseph enjoy it, McDonald said.

“If I did one of those Masses at 9:30 (a.m.), there would be a riot,” he said.

The conference concludes Friday at 11 a.m. with a special Mass incorporating Gregorian chant. The public is invited.

Does lingering on one word for 15 seconds evoke greater spiritual meditation?

Rice said that’s a question the faithful have to decide for themselves.

“Clearly the writers of chant thought it was important to meditate on a word or two of scripture for that amount of time,” he said. “I don’t think it’s so far away from people’s sensibilities of what is spiritual, really, this idea of meditation, of stopping in our busy world to refuel, reflect on one moment, one beautiful thing.”

To contact writer Liz Fabian, call 744-4303.

Read more here: http://www.macon.com/2013/01/10/2311690/macon-hosts-gregorian-chant-conference.html#storylink=cpy

SUNDAY CELEBRATIONS IN THE ABSENCE OF A PRIEST

In 1994 there was a book prepared by the Committee on the liturgy of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops and approved for use in the Dioceses of the USA by the NCCB. It is entitled, "Sunday Celebrations in the Absence of a Priest."

It is a liturgical book that gives options for parishes when no priest is available on a Sunday. The expectation in the norms of the "General Instruction or Introduction" of this liturgical book is that the bishop be very much involved in the decision making process of the necessity of such a celebration in particular parishes in the absence of a priest on Sunday and that preference be given first to deacons to conduct such celebrations or in their complete absence to qualified and well trained laity.

The preference is that Morning or Evening Prayer be the means by which Sunday Celebrations in the absence of a priest take place. The allowance of Holy Communion from the tabernacle is included in this form.

The second choice is a Liturgy of the Word celebration with Holy Communion. There is also a liturgy for Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament by a deacon of course without the distribution of Holy Communion.

The thrust of this liturgical book is that these kinds of celebrations should be very much regulated and a last resort, especially if other priests can be sent to the parish or the parishioners themselves can go to nearby churches that have a priest.

I suspect this is for more rural areas where there in no other close by Catholic Church for people to conveniently attend when they have no priest in their parish on a Sunday.

There is no Liturgical Book and thus no norms for the distribution of Holy Communion in the absence of a priest during the week when no priest is available for daily Mass, although it is quite common in my parish and in one other parish in the city to have them. In my parish it is only for the most rare of circumstances, in the other parish it is a regular occurrence on the pastor's day off which is Friday.

Thus, and I only render an opinion here, and I hope canonists could chime in, since there is no obligation for the laity to attend Mass during the week that there is no need for celebrations in the absence of a priest where Holy Communion is distributed.

However, in lieu of that, in my most humble opinion, there could be Morning or Evening Prayer from the Liturgy of the Hours celebrated by a deacon or qualified lay person or even Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament by a deacon in place of a daily Mass.

In other words, there is no consideration given by the bishops of the United States of America that Holy Communion be distributed at Communion Services during the week when a priest is not available for Mass. This consideration is only given to Sunday celebrations in the absence of a priest.

Am I wrong and do I need to adjust my most humble opinion in this regard?

FEEL GOOD RELIGION: THE BIBLE LEADS ME TO WANT TO DO THIS!

MY FIRST COMMENT: Make no mistake about it; those in the Catholic Church who are opposed to the Reform of the Reform in Continuity are opposed to it because they know that the Catholic Church when faithful to her traditions and to the tradition of Sacred Scripture, Tradition and Natural Law, will never, ever ordain women, jettison divine law revealed in Scripture, Tradition and Natural Law and will never call fornication, adultery, sodomy and other unnatural forms of sex anything but what they are, disordered and if knowingly committed, realizing these are sins and doing so with full consent of the will, are mortally sinful and thus if one dies unrepentant and unreconciled to God and His Holy Church, one is condemned into the everlasting fires of Gehenna. (Is that too harsh and not feel good religion enough?)

What "spirit of Vatican II" Catholics fear most about the reform of the reform in continuity is authentic authority and the liturgy that supports it. They much more prefer their bogus form of authority and the liturgy that supports that. We could say as St. John's Letters that we read during the Christmas/Epiphany weekday readings for Mass that in them lies the heart of the anti-Christ. It is also anti-Church, anti-pope. It is a new form of gnosticism and as ugly as the original condemned heresy of the Church. You can see it at work in the Episcopal Church and it is certainly at work in many post-Catholics in the Church today:

SAME SEX MARRIAGE CEREMONIES WILL TAKE PLACE AT WASHINGTON, DC'S NATIONAL CATHEDRAL, (PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF AMERICA).

Longtime same-sex marriage advocate the Very Rev. Gary Hall took over as the Washington Cathedral's dean in October (Protestant Episcopal Church of America).

He said, "I read the Bible as seriously as fundamentalists do," Hall told the AP. "And my reading of the Bible leads me to want to do this because I think it's being faithful to the kind of community that Jesus would have us be."

My final comments: At least in the Catholic Church, infallibility is only accorded to one man alone, and that is the pope and even then he must act in continuity with the authentic faith of the Church and her tradition of Scripture, Tradition and Natural Law.

Protestants on the other hand, have had a creeping infallibility accorded to almost every believer, thus if you believe it and it makes you feel good, it must be true. And thus you can have an Episcopal dean say within his Protestant tradition of creeping infallibility of every person, "And my reading of the Bible leads me to want to do this because I think it's being faithful to the kind of community that Jesus would have us be."

Case closed, infallibility triumphs. Ecumenism is dealt a deadly blow. God must not want ecumenism.