The Holy Father recently gave an improvised talk to the members of the Choir of the Pontifical Chapel. In this talk he made some truly extraordinary statements regarding the function that papal liturgies play in setting the liturgical tone for the universal Church. Benedict said:"Papal liturgies, broadcast internationally, are a model by which all liturgical celebrations can be measured...papal ceremonies should be liturgical paradigms for the entire world. Those who follow papal ceremonies probably use them as a measure of accord by which the liturgy must be measured. In this way, the liturgy is transformed into a path through which the Pope teaches the Catholic faithful, giving them a proper idea of what they should expect [from the liturgy]." (Miles Christi Report, no. 107, Sept. 2009).Those who follow papal ceremonies probably use them as a measure of accord by which the liturgy must be measured.
Two things to point out about this simple but true statement:
Number one. The pope is very clearly stating that his own liturgies are meant to be instructive. This means that when he decides that all communicants at papal masses will receive kneeling, or that he will celebrate Mass ad orientam in the Sistine Chapel, he is not simply doing these things because he is an antiquarian who happens to personally have a taste for them. When he celebrates ad orientam, he is saying in effect, "I am doing this to show you what you should be doing." This should give some ammunition to priests or bishops who want to institute these practices in their own parishes - the pope has stated that he is intentionally setting an example that he wishes the faithful to follow. I think this is common sense, so I'll move on to point two.
Second, the pope states something that should give us pause: whether or not the pope intentionally tries to teach through the liturgy, he points out that this is what will in fact happen regardless:
In effect he is saying, "I know that my liturgies will be used as examples to follow regardless of whether I want them to or not; therefore, I'd better make sure all my liturgies give positive examples."
This provides the justification of the well-known disdain of trads for the masses of John Paul II, which were frequently the scenes of grave liturgical abuse ...
Pope Benedict points out the obvious truth that people will mimic what they see the pope doing - what does it mean then when John Paul II declares in encyclicals like Redemptionis Sacramentum and Eucharistia de Ecclesia that liturgical abuses are to be curbed immediately but then permits them at his own masses? We can only conclude one of two things: that John Paul II was terribly naive or else he was just a negligent pastor. However you slice it, John Paul II's liturgical administration was definitely not praiseworthy. I'm not going to say that this alone makes or breaks his papacy, but it should definitely be taken into consideration, especially when questions about canonization come up.
Papal liturgies should be teaching moments, Benedict reminds us. The pope should do the liturgy the way he wants the Church to do it. He ought not to do a liturgy one way and then tell the Church to do it another; it was doing precisely this that led to the confusion of the JPII years. Hopefully we will see more bishops and priests taking the pope's liturgies as paradigms around which to structure their own masses.
Universalis, your very own breviary in pixels...
Wednesday, 16 September 2009
Benedict, the Teacher
From the blog Unam, Sanctam, Catholicam:(GREAT stuff!)
Baptisms
In the wake of the anniversary of Summorum Pontificum, there was comment about complaint about reminiscence about prediction about..... and anyway, I came across this from two years ago:
No argument, restoration, (if indeed it is a restoration, the arguments over we used to..." oh yeah, well before THAT we used to..." interest me not a jot, except insofar as they betray the frequent pretense and fabrications on both sides of the those argument,... but I digress, the restoration," of the catechumenate is on balance a good thing.
And it is clear, of course, that not even famously "practicing" cradle Catholics, much less celebrity converts, need abjure anything at all that conflicts with the faith, or renounce anything that pleases them, or really change at all -- "Oh no, when we ask you to stand up with us and say ' We believe…’, we don't mean we actually believe....")
I will not say that that is a good thing, on balance or otherwise.
No, what interested me is the mention of Baptism.
I did not know that about the old ritual of Baptism.
The parents said not a word, huh?
I would have been baptized with the old one, but really only remember the rite, or rather the multiplicity of rites, as it stands now, (I will not ride, or rather beat, my usual hobby horse of the Rites of Baptism at Our Lady of the Way We Do It Here)
It dates from, when? the 1970s? 1980?
In any case, that little tidbit quote above from the put-out Prog finally explains what has always nagged at me about baptisms nowadays.
Infant Baptism as the ritual is enacted now has lots for the parents to say and do, and lots for the god-parents, they say this and ask that, and hold one and receive another, and move hither and yon -- it feels, when all is said and done, like a scrutiny of, and then induction of, the adults involved.
The baby is just an adorable or obstreperous prop.
Oh, I know the priest in performing the exorcism and pouring the water is the conduit through which SANCTIFYING GRACE is conferred on the infant.
Yes, that is the salient point of the Sacrament that is its most noteworthy aspect, but not, as we practice it, the most noticeable.
I am not one of those who complains, why are they doing that in the middle of my Mass? making my Mass longer? (and believe me, I have tried to placate and to explain to many people over the years, both when it was part of my job and when it wasn't, why baptisms in front of the community are a Good Thing.)
I am glad to be in a parish that permits baptisms at Sunday Mass, (not so much to be in a parish that requires it....)
But the Rites... forgive me, who complains often enough about others fetishizing their feelings, felt wrong.
It has always bothered me, but I had never thought to tease out exactly why.
And there it is -- the Rite is apparently deliberately constructed to give people other than the recipients and the ministers of the sacrament Something To Do.
(And that's not even counting the ceremonies as celebrated in our Parish Family Faith Community -- why use one word when four will do?-- which further rigs the rigmarole. Probably would further roll it, too, if some had their way -- yeah, I know Christ instituted it, but what can I do to make special?)
It feels as if they - we?- are reaching... to " involve" people, (the way it does when the congregation is asked to stand and pose as extras from Triumph of the Will.)
So not only does that aspect of the ritual ring false, (as makework always will,) it implicitly tells us that the main even is community-building, it's all about community, it's all about initiation... the receipt of Sanctifying Grace?
Ooooh, let's not talk about that, shall we, that would send out signals we actually believe in the existence of Original Sin.
In any case, the faults, (if flauts there be, you may not see it that way,) do not necessarily lie so much with the Rite, as with the way it is enacted.
But perhaps a good ritual is so structured as to not allow too much re-prioritizing.
How can it be “for the benefit of the faithful” to return to a ritual of baptism in which the parents of infants say nothing? In the spirit of ecumenism, the liturgy that came out of Vatican II eliminated the abjuration of heresy and schism that non-Catholics made before being admitted to Catholic communion. How can we justify reviving such practices today? There was no catechumenate in the Tridentine church, despite a crying need around the world for this liturgical structure of evangelization and formation.
No argument, restoration, (if indeed it is a restoration, the arguments over we used to..." oh yeah, well before THAT we used to..." interest me not a jot, except insofar as they betray the frequent pretense and fabrications on both sides of the those argument,... but I digress, the restoration," of the catechumenate is on balance a good thing.
And it is clear, of course, that not even famously "practicing" cradle Catholics, much less celebrity converts, need abjure anything at all that conflicts with the faith, or renounce anything that pleases them, or really change at all -- "Oh no, when we ask you to stand up with us and say ' We believe…’, we don't mean we actually believe....")
I will not say that that is a good thing, on balance or otherwise.
No, what interested me is the mention of Baptism.
I did not know that about the old ritual of Baptism.
The parents said not a word, huh?
I would have been baptized with the old one, but really only remember the rite, or rather the multiplicity of rites, as it stands now, (I will not ride, or rather beat, my usual hobby horse of the Rites of Baptism at Our Lady of the Way We Do It Here)
It dates from, when? the 1970s? 1980?
In any case, that little tidbit quote above from the put-out Prog finally explains what has always nagged at me about baptisms nowadays.
Infant Baptism as the ritual is enacted now has lots for the parents to say and do, and lots for the god-parents, they say this and ask that, and hold one and receive another, and move hither and yon -- it feels, when all is said and done, like a scrutiny of, and then induction of, the adults involved.
The baby is just an adorable or obstreperous prop.
Oh, I know the priest in performing the exorcism and pouring the water is the conduit through which SANCTIFYING GRACE is conferred on the infant.
Yes, that is the salient point of the Sacrament that is its most noteworthy aspect, but not, as we practice it, the most noticeable.
I am not one of those who complains, why are they doing that in the middle of my Mass? making my Mass longer? (and believe me, I have tried to placate and to explain to many people over the years, both when it was part of my job and when it wasn't, why baptisms in front of the community are a Good Thing.)
I am glad to be in a parish that permits baptisms at Sunday Mass, (not so much to be in a parish that requires it....)
But the Rites... forgive me, who complains often enough about others fetishizing their feelings, felt wrong.
It has always bothered me, but I had never thought to tease out exactly why.
And there it is -- the Rite is apparently deliberately constructed to give people other than the recipients and the ministers of the sacrament Something To Do.
(And that's not even counting the ceremonies as celebrated in our Parish Family Faith Community -- why use one word when four will do?-- which further rigs the rigmarole. Probably would further roll it, too, if some had their way -- yeah, I know Christ instituted it, but what can I do to make special?)
It feels as if they - we?- are reaching... to " involve" people, (the way it does when the congregation is asked to stand and pose as extras from Triumph of the Will.)
Ooooh, let's not talk about that, shall we, that would send out signals we actually believe in the existence of Original Sin.
In any case, the faults, (if flauts there be, you may not see it that way,) do not necessarily lie so much with the Rite, as with the way it is enacted.
But perhaps a good ritual is so structured as to not allow too much re-prioritizing.
"Lugubrious"?
Without going into the merits of the point of view expressed in the linked column (there are enough people raking the writer over the coals for that,) I know, de gustibus non est disputandum, and all that, but to quote the great etymologist, Inigo Montoya, I don' thin' that word means what you thin' it means.
But I am, as always drawn to analogies, and I am reminded of an interview I gave once, to a theater critic.
She had just returned from a sabbatical, where she had, appropriately enough, studied theatre, and even done a little acting.
This journalist, whose reviews could be make-or-break for some theatre companies, who could literally close a show with her criticism, told me she had become fascinated by some of the mechanics of working on stage;
for instance, she said she had never realized before that "you have to think about props and things while trying to remember your lines!"
It's always nice for people to keep informed on matters that they are paid to write about....
But I am, as always drawn to analogies, and I am reminded of an interview I gave once, to a theater critic.
She had just returned from a sabbatical, where she had, appropriately enough, studied theatre, and even done a little acting.
This journalist, whose reviews could be make-or-break for some theatre companies, who could literally close a show with her criticism, told me she had become fascinated by some of the mechanics of working on stage;
for instance, she said she had never realized before that "you have to think about props and things while trying to remember your lines!"
It's always nice for people to keep informed on matters that they are paid to write about....
O the times, o the mores
I wonder if it is in this country?
A court in Barcelona says insulting your boss with one particularly foul obscenity is not grounds for dismissal, insisting the slight is common in arguments in Spain and not that big a deal.The zinger in question translates as "son of a b----," and was used by a worker against his boss during a January 2008 money dispute in the northeastern city of Gerona. The worker, who also called his boss "crazy," was promptly fired.
The man lost a first court challenge, but won on appeal with the Superior Court of Justice of ....
"Without a doubt, both expressions are insulting," Judge Sara Maria Pose Vidal said ...
She also wrote that the "son of a b----" remark should be viewed in linguistic context.
"The social degradation of language has caused the expressions used by the plaintiff to become commonly used in certain settings, especially in arguments," Pose Vidal wrote, calling his dismissal a disproportionate punishment.
Tuesday, 15 September 2009
Throwing in Our Lot With Idiots and Ogres
Not to mention tax collectors and prostitutes and gentiles.
I think I first encountered this fellow in a refreshing, if back-handedly complimentary assessment of the recently retired Bishop Martino:
I merely note that it is an interesting aspect of his POV.
And THIS is how said recent convert sees a certain sort of would be progressive, the sort whom one would-be pundit of liberal Catholicism soothingly assured, recently, that they were doing the right thing if they just couldn't bear to be a part of Mean Ol' Mother Church for the time being:
I have little patience with those who not just anticipate the Holy Father's posited leaner, keener Body of Christ, but those who actually revel in it, with cries of "Good riddance" to those who decide to opt out of the Faith of Hard Sayings.
We are called to love.
We are called to love them.
We are called to want them back.
We are called to try to get them back, (though not at any cost -- one does not picture Jesus running after people saying, no, no, guys! com'on back, what I said wasn't TRUE, it was just a metaphor!)
But it's hard sometimes to not just roll your eyes, sigh, and go about your business, when they storm off to their rooms.
Kind of the way you do with a tantrum-throwing 2 year old, or his pretentious, angst-consumed adolescent sibling.
I number the LCWR spokeswom... spokespersons among this group.
But like Lindenman in another column, even though I know that "the ornery sisters aren’t getting any younger," and that "at this point in history, depriving itself of American religious sisters, either by dismissing or alienating them, couldn’t hurt [the Church] less. To put it bluntly, women religious are already stuck in the margins," my heart, too, goes out to them, "tottering off to the barricades."
I think I first encountered this fellow in a refreshing, if back-handedly complimentary assessment of the recently retired Bishop Martino:
I may not be the sort of Catholic who normally appreciates a hardline scold like Joseph Martino, who resigned August 31st as bishop of Scranton, Pennsylvania. But all the same, I feel a eulogy coming on.It is interesting that Lindenman is a very recent convert. That makes his perspective neither necessarily more objective, nor necessarily less informed.... we've gotten no end of input from flamboyant busybodies who claim to know what's wrong with how we live our lives. ...Bill O'Reilly may have been the first one vain enough to invest himself with the title of culture warrior ...
I contend it does a gross injustice to the profession of arms. People like O'Reilly and Alan Keyes and Bill Bennett, whose broad, often intemperate statements expose them to little risk but make them big bucks, are more like wartime profiteers ...
Bishop Martino was the real thing -- Ein Trau Husar, as the old martial air goes. Presiding over a diocese that was crumbling under a shortage of priests and money, he nagged the nation's Catholics on matters of doctrine for no apparent reason than that he felt they needed nagging. Though I myself cannot bear to be nagged, I find Bishop Martino's self-starting scrappiness admirable, [emphasis supplied] even touching -- kind of a Mr. Smith Goes to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops kind of thing.
I merely note that it is an interesting aspect of his POV.
And THIS is how said recent convert sees a certain sort of would be progressive, the sort whom one would-be pundit of liberal Catholicism soothingly assured, recently, that they were doing the right thing if they just couldn't bear to be a part of Mean Ol' Mother Church for the time being:
So-called intentional Eucharistic communities... gather regularly and celebrate the Eucharist, with a member of the laity presiding.
If this sounds like schism or heresy -- well, it could be both. But members are quick to argue that autonomous, lay-managed communities come with a respectable pedigree. Apologists cite Fr. Edward Schillebeeckx, O.P. (a man I love for his name alone; it sounds like one of those lagers that looks like real maple syrup and costs even more by volume), who observes that early Church communities elected both their priests and their bishops, rather the way militia units in colonial America elected their officers....
That’s the theory. In practice, where there is no question how any given Catholic bishop will receive a request to ordain a lay presider, these communities have little contact with the larger Church. ...
Far from damaging the Church, the communities’ most determined partisans see a widespread ecclesiastical tea-party movement as the only thing capable of saving it. "The greater body of the church is clearly in trouble today," author Richard McClory promised guests at last June’s gathering of Eucharistic community members. "I would suspect strongly that it is groups like yours that can point the way to newer, better ways."
Yes, there’s a certain amount of hubris in this statement. McClory’s generation, with its tetchy conscience and passion for speaking truth to power, may matter less to the Church’s health than its members imagine. ...
[An] important question is whether these semi-secessionists realize that, by separating themselves, they are walking away from the greatest challenge in Christian life. I refer to getting along with -- in fact, working up charitable feelings for -- people you’re sure are idiots and ogres. [emphasis supplied]
The original Apostles tolerated a tax collector in their midst. I can sit through Mass next to some vagrant who looks ready to toss a gallon of used Colt 45 in my lap by way of offering the Sign of Peace. Refusing the Eucharist from a priest who fails to appreciate the importance of inclusive language sounds just a touch too precious.[emphasis supplied]
I have little patience with those who not just anticipate the Holy Father's posited leaner, keener Body of Christ, but those who actually revel in it, with cries of "Good riddance" to those who decide to opt out of the Faith of Hard Sayings.
We are called to love.
We are called to love them.
We are called to want them back.
We are called to try to get them back, (though not at any cost -- one does not picture Jesus running after people saying, no, no, guys! com'on back, what I said wasn't TRUE, it was just a metaphor!)
But it's hard sometimes to not just roll your eyes, sigh, and go about your business, when they storm off to their rooms.
Kind of the way you do with a tantrum-throwing 2 year old, or his pretentious, angst-consumed adolescent sibling.
I number the LCWR spokeswom... spokespersons among this group.
But like Lindenman in another column, even though I know that "the ornery sisters aren’t getting any younger," and that "at this point in history, depriving itself of American religious sisters, either by dismissing or alienating them, couldn’t hurt [the Church] less. To put it bluntly, women religious are already stuck in the margins," my heart, too, goes out to them, "tottering off to the barricades."
Will we allow half the sky to fall down?
A review of a book on tragic, and important issue, shares, (with its subject? I haven't read the book,) a curious blindspot:
They cannot bring themselves to admit the part that abortion, that societal and state sanctioned killing of the unborn for purposes of sex selection plays in this.
Fear they'd lose their liberal cred?
If only they would embrace true liberality.
Gendercide indeed.
Today, now, more than 100 million women are missing. They have vanished. In normal circumstances, women live longer than men—but China has 107 males for every 100 females in its overall population, India has 108, and Pakistan has 111. Where have these women gone? They have been killed or allowed to die. Medical treatment is often reserved for boys, while violence against women is routine. More girls are killed in this "gendercide" each decade than in all the genocides of the 20th century. This year, another 2 million girls will "disappear."
They cannot bring themselves to admit the part that abortion, that societal and state sanctioned killing of the unborn for purposes of sex selection plays in this.
Fear they'd lose their liberal cred?
If only they would embrace true liberality.
Gendercide indeed.
Interspecies Warfare
What is with the squirrels?
What is with them this year?
I hate squirrels.
Why are they ignoring my yellow peppers, (off of which I could not keep them last summer,) and molesting my tender little flowering plum babies? (which they can't even eat, squirrels in a manger!)
And when did they stop being frightened of us?!??!#??&?
They refuse to yield until I am within actual swatting distance, and I swear, when my arms are full and they realize thet are in no actual danger of swatting, they stand their ground and mock me.
And why do they go through my compost bucket, (to which they are welcome, generally, knock gyourselves out on banana skins, boys,) only to scatter teabags across my porch?
Teabags?
Does this reveal heretofore hidden political leanings?
And leave my grape tomatoes alone, you!
Brazen, furry little rats...
I hate squirrels.
What is with them this year?
I hate squirrels.
Why are they ignoring my yellow peppers, (off of which I could not keep them last summer,) and molesting my tender little flowering plum babies? (which they can't even eat, squirrels in a manger!)
And when did they stop being frightened of us?!??!#??&?
They refuse to yield until I am within actual swatting distance, and I swear, when my arms are full and they realize thet are in no actual danger of swatting, they stand their ground and mock me.
And why do they go through my compost bucket, (to which they are welcome, generally, knock gyourselves out on banana skins, boys,) only to scatter teabags across my porch?
Teabags?
Does this reveal heretofore hidden political leanings?
And leave my grape tomatoes alone, you!
Brazen, furry little rats...
I hate squirrels.
Monday, 14 September 2009
Why I love fashion...
Even... or maybe especially, rock'n'roll fashion.
I mean, how could this NOT be best new artist of the year?
Maybe I can borrow the outfit for Halloween this year to go as Mrs. Torquemada.
I mean, how could this NOT be best new artist of the year?
Maybe I can borrow the outfit for Halloween this year to go as Mrs. Torquemada.
Hymns by Father Faber
The, (occasionally more rancorous than I would wish,) discussion of the proper contents of a truly "Catholic" English language hymnal over at the CMAA fora piqued my curiosity.
Well, initially, it shamed me -- Noel & c. listed so many text and tunes of which I had never heard!
And for quite a while, really ever since I found the Britt book, cheap on eBay, I'd been interested in the Office Hymns, and then I thought this year being potentially a very great one for Cardinal Newman I really ought to introduce the choir to some of his, and then there was talk of Chesterton whom I was unaware had written hymns, (though it only makes sense, him being a poet and all, duh...) and I began to think of other converts, and frankly, WOW.
I had no idea Fr Faber was so prolific. Charming self-deprecation:
Did you know there were so many? I didn't.
Well, initially, it shamed me -- Noel & c. listed so many text and tunes of which I had never heard!
And for quite a while, really ever since I found the Britt book, cheap on eBay, I'd been interested in the Office Hymns, and then I thought this year being potentially a very great one for Cardinal Newman I really ought to introduce the choir to some of his, and then there was talk of Chesterton whom I was unaware had written hymns, (though it only makes sense, him being a poet and all, duh...) and I began to think of other converts, and frankly, WOW.
I had no idea Fr Faber was so prolific. Charming self-deprecation:
The domestic wants of the Oratory kept alive the feeling that[English Catholic hymns were] needed; though at the same time the Author’s ignorance of music appeared in some measure to disqualify him for the work of supplying the defect. Eleven, however, of the hymns were written, most of them, for particular tunes and on particular occasions, and became very popular with a country congregation. They were afterwards printed for the schools at St. Wilfrid’s, and the very numerous applications to the printer for them seemed to show that, in spite of very glaring literary defects, such as careless grammar or slipshod metre, people were anxious to have Catholic hymns of any sort. The MS. of the present volume was submitted to a musical friend, who replied that certain verses of all or nearly all the hymns would do for singing; and this encouragement has led to the publication
Did you know there were so many? I didn't.
- Blood Is the Price of Heaven
- By the Archangel’s Word of Love
- Dear God of Orphans, Hear Our Prayer
- Dear Jesus, Ever at My Side
- Exceeding Sorrowful to Death
- Faith of Our Fathers
- From Pain to Pain, from Woe to Woe
- Hark! Hark, My Soul!
- Have Mercy on Us, God Most High
- Holy Ghost, Come Down upon Thy Children
- I Wish to Have No Wishes Left
- I Worship Thee, Sweet Will of God
- Jesu, Gentlest Savior
- Jesus Is God!
- Jesus, My Lord, My God, My All!
- My God! My God! And Can It Be
- My God, How Wonderful Thou Art
- O Come and Mourn with Me
- O Gift of Gifts!
- O Jesus, Jesus
- O God, Thy Power Is Wonderful
- O How the Thought of God Attracts
- O Paradise!
- O Soul of Jesus, Sick to Death
- Oh! Come to the Merciful Savior
- Pilgrims of the Night, The
- Sleep, Sleep My Beautiful Babe
- Souls of Men! Why Will Ye Scatter
- Sweet Savior, Bless Us Ere We Go
- Thy Home Is with the Humble, Lord
- True Shepherd, The
- Why Is Thy Face So Lit with Smiles?
- Workman of God
"Bombarded"?
Okay, it's not my country, and I don't know the writer, and I'm not certain I disagree with him, separation of C & S and all that in this country, BUT.....
In an otherwise just-the-facts-m'am bit of reportage does saying that schoolchildren are "bombarded" with Catholicism not strike you as... I dunno, a tudge subjective? editorializing? partisan?
I'm only interested in Malta for their graphics :oP
No, seriously, I don't have a dog in that fight, but reading that reminded me unpleasantly of my current efforts to stay informed anent finances, health care, education, government, Church politics, heck, nutrition, you name it -- it is becoming nigh unto impossible.
Teasing out primary sources, (oh, you mean so-and-so didn't actually say that? you are paraphrasing a description by an opponent? well what did he REALLY say?) ) and then wading through them sometimes -- where are the digests and extracts in which you can put faith?
It seems to me, in this country, ever more difficult to find trusty objective reporting on anything, everyone has an ax to grind (understandable,) and nobody has any qualms about letting their personal bias influence what is meant to be journalism.
I try to access various sources, including, perhaps especially, those who might be suspected to have a different perspective than my own, but it is becoming time consuming.
In an otherwise just-the-facts-m'am bit of reportage does saying that schoolchildren are "bombarded" with Catholicism not strike you as... I dunno, a tudge subjective? editorializing? partisan?
I'm only interested in Malta for their graphics :oP
No, seriously, I don't have a dog in that fight, but reading that reminded me unpleasantly of my current efforts to stay informed anent finances, health care, education, government, Church politics, heck, nutrition, you name it -- it is becoming nigh unto impossible.
Teasing out primary sources, (oh, you mean so-and-so didn't actually say that? you are paraphrasing a description by an opponent? well what did he REALLY say?) ) and then wading through them sometimes -- where are the digests and extracts in which you can put faith?
It seems to me, in this country, ever more difficult to find trusty objective reporting on anything, everyone has an ax to grind (understandable,) and nobody has any qualms about letting their personal bias influence what is meant to be journalism.
I try to access various sources, including, perhaps especially, those who might be suspected to have a different perspective than my own, but it is becoming time consuming.
Copywrong
After a long weekend, a looooong weekend, I am engaging in some reflection.
I am a scofflaw.
I am a criminal.
We are singing a certain Mass.
This is a setting we, (for despite what I was told were my duties, I cannot make unilateral decisions,) choose to use, it has found favour with divers denizens of the 'rish.
And while given my 'druthers, we would be introducing a Gregorian ordinary, I am not musically or liturgically ashamed to be singing and playing this one to my God.
Now, I have a stack of lovely, (relatively) expensive, sturdy(surprisingly, in light of how shabby and flimsy much published Catholic liturgical music is,) cantor/choral/organ copies of this Mass ordinary.
Originals, those of you loft-dwellers with toner for blood will understand, and be shocked to know. (I have a MD acquaintance who never programs anything written before the youngest member of her choir was born, but whose choir hasn't laid a finger on a purchased piece of music since... well, before I was born. Shh.)
I acquired them after great difficulty, but that is not really pertinent.
What is pertinent, is that they are not usable.
I knew they would not be, (I already had one,) but I purchased them, (with my own, not 'rish money,) as a CYA strategy, morally speaking.
I haven't covered anything legally speaking.
But since the odds of a successful musical outing using these copies would be nil,
(unless the choir's program said, Stand at the ready, and when the celebrant says either "As we prepare... ask for pardon and strength," or, "Coming together...full of gentleness and compassion" or "My brothers and sisters...to mind our sins," we wait 5 seconds and if he doesn't launch into "Together, I confess to...." then I will play first five notes of the Kyrie, but for the love of pete don't sing it because the cantor will have to look at another page and sing an invocation recto tono, and then we'll sing that "Lord, have mercy" but if the priest isn't confiteor-phobic we'll sing it as written, but that top line is the congregation melody so your staffs are the next two down, printed in identical type-face and note size, so as you turn the page which you have to do every four measures the way this thing is laid out, make sure your eye goes to the correct staff...
and I can pretty much guarantee that even if the program were that detailed, it would go virtually unread; and that's not even getting into the
Agnus, Sing "verse" 1 and then skip the next page, and sing verse 3, but with the same words as verse one rather than "Bread of Angles, You take away..." or "Basket of Goodies You take...," or "Rainbow Buddy....", oh and then skip the next 6 choices and go to that last one,)
and there are not enough hours in the day or paperclips in the loft to go through all the originals and mark them so that people would have even a 50/50 chance of singing as I intend, I choose to defy the law and---
Oh no! Make copies of choral music!
That's right, mark and arrange a single copy, consolidate these user-unfriendly, multi-page-turn-requiring movements of the Ordinary of the Mass onto single pieces of paper, (and STILL enlarge the print considerably,) and make photocopies.
I'm sorry, I'm in a snotty mood about the laws governing these things, having been told in a wide-ranging discussion recently, by people who seem to know, that SINE NOMINE, published in 1906, is still under copyright.
Cui bono?
(Besides Mickey, for instance, Mr Bono...)
I am a scofflaw.
I am a criminal.
We are singing a certain Mass.
This is a setting we, (for despite what I was told were my duties, I cannot make unilateral decisions,) choose to use, it has found favour with divers denizens of the 'rish.
And while given my 'druthers, we would be introducing a Gregorian ordinary, I am not musically or liturgically ashamed to be singing and playing this one to my God.
Now, I have a stack of lovely, (relatively) expensive, sturdy(surprisingly, in light of how shabby and flimsy much published Catholic liturgical music is,) cantor/choral/organ copies of this Mass ordinary.
Originals, those of you loft-dwellers with toner for blood will understand, and be shocked to know. (I have a MD acquaintance who never programs anything written before the youngest member of her choir was born, but whose choir hasn't laid a finger on a purchased piece of music since... well, before I was born. Shh.)
I acquired them after great difficulty, but that is not really pertinent.
What is pertinent, is that they are not usable.
I knew they would not be, (I already had one,) but I purchased them, (with my own, not 'rish money,) as a CYA strategy, morally speaking.
I haven't covered anything legally speaking.
But since the odds of a successful musical outing using these copies would be nil,
(unless the choir's program said, Stand at the ready, and when the celebrant says either "As we prepare... ask for pardon and strength," or, "Coming together...full of gentleness and compassion" or "My brothers and sisters...to mind our sins," we wait 5 seconds and if he doesn't launch into "Together, I confess to...." then I will play first five notes of the Kyrie, but for the love of pete don't sing it because the cantor will have to look at another page and sing an invocation recto tono, and then we'll sing that "Lord, have mercy" but if the priest isn't confiteor-phobic we'll sing it as written, but that top line is the congregation melody so your staffs are the next two down, printed in identical type-face and note size, so as you turn the page which you have to do every four measures the way this thing is laid out, make sure your eye goes to the correct staff...
and I can pretty much guarantee that even if the program were that detailed, it would go virtually unread; and that's not even getting into the
Agnus, Sing "verse" 1 and then skip the next page, and sing verse 3, but with the same words as verse one rather than "Bread of Angles, You take away..." or "Basket of Goodies You take...," or "Rainbow Buddy....", oh and then skip the next 6 choices and go to that last one,)
and there are not enough hours in the day or paperclips in the loft to go through all the originals and mark them so that people would have even a 50/50 chance of singing as I intend, I choose to defy the law and---
Oh no! Make copies of choral music!
That's right, mark and arrange a single copy, consolidate these user-unfriendly, multi-page-turn-requiring movements of the Ordinary of the Mass onto single pieces of paper, (and STILL enlarge the print considerably,) and make photocopies.
Come and get me, Copper!
I'm sorry, I'm in a snotty mood about the laws governing these things, having been told in a wide-ranging discussion recently, by people who seem to know, that SINE NOMINE, published in 1906, is still under copyright.
Cui bono?
(Besides Mickey, for instance, Mr Bono...)
"I felt really guilty because it was my mom’s kidney and I broke it..."
A case where a government-run program is penny-wise and pound-ARE YOU INSANE?!?#?$??^?&?*?!!????
Oh, excuse me, got carried away there.
But seriously, commonsense much?
Ya got kidney disease?
Oh, sure, we'll pay 71,000.oo a year for you to have dialysis, and when that no longer does the trick, here's upward of 100,00.oo for a transplant -- but two or three thousand a month for anti-rejection drugs?
Whadya think, we're MADE of money?
Stupid, stupid, stupid.
It sounds like a fairly typical case of someone with no knowledge whatever of a field, of THE WAY THINGS WORK, having charge of decisions in that field.
Not that that's a hobby horse of mine, priestsandmusicians...
We need health care reform in this country, but why must we assume ill will on the part of those who disagree on the direction in which we must go to achieve it?
Let's just assume ignorance, she said cattily.
And meanwhile, I hope Ms. Whitaker's kidney takes.
So far as I know, AC's is doing fine.
Oh, excuse me, got carried away there.
But seriously, commonsense much?
Ya got kidney disease?
Oh, sure, we'll pay 71,000.oo a year for you to have dialysis, and when that no longer does the trick, here's upward of 100,00.oo for a transplant -- but two or three thousand a month for anti-rejection drugs?
Whadya think, we're MADE of money?
Stupid, stupid, stupid.
It sounds like a fairly typical case of someone with no knowledge whatever of a field, of THE WAY THINGS WORK, having charge of decisions in that field.
Not that that's a hobby horse of mine, priestsandmusicians...
We need health care reform in this country, but why must we assume ill will on the part of those who disagree on the direction in which we must go to achieve it?
Let's just assume ignorance, she said cattily.
And meanwhile, I hope Ms. Whitaker's kidney takes.
So far as I know, AC's is doing fine.
Sunday, 13 September 2009
A Prayer for Vocations
No, not what you think...
It could have saved me quite a bit of... what? what did I experience that I wish I had not on the road to recognizing my vocation?
Nothing, perhaps...
Nonetheless, I wish I had thought to, known to actively discern.
Prayer For Choosing One's VocationFrom the Religious Sisters of Mercy website.
God of wisdom and of counsel, You see in my heart a sincere desire to please You alone and to conform myself entirely to Your holy Will in the choice of my state in life. Grant me, I humbly implore You, by the intercession of the Blessed Virgin, my Mother, and my holy Patrons, the grace to know what state in life I should choose and to embrace it when known, in order that I may seek Your glory and increase it, work out my own salvation, and deserve the heavenly reward which You have promised to those who do Your holy Will. Amen.Treasury of Prayer, Lawrence B. Lovasik, S.V.D., 1954
It could have saved me quite a bit of... what? what did I experience that I wish I had not on the road to recognizing my vocation?
Nothing, perhaps...
Nonetheless, I wish I had thought to, known to actively discern.
Henceforth to be known as "The Other Ones"
Do the headline writers actually read the articles first?
According to NCR Bishop Slattery said that his reverting to ad orientem "ought not to be misconstrued as the bishop 'turning his back on the faithful,' as if I am being inconsiderate or hostile. Such an interpretation misses the point that, by facing in the same direction, the posture of the celebrant and the congregation make explicit the fact that we journey together to God."
But the headline writer, (or the author?) trumpets, "Okla. bishop no longer faces people at Mass!"
Because why miss an opportunity to be negative, ignorant, and hostile to anyone in the hierarchy, particularly anyone in the hierarchy who is working for a restoration of reverence and a right ordering of our priorities in Liturgy?
But the headline writer, (or the author?) trumpets, "Okla. bishop no longer faces people at Mass!"
Because why miss an opportunity to be negative, ignorant, and hostile to anyone in the hierarchy, particularly anyone in the hierarchy who is working for a restoration of reverence and a right ordering of our priorities in Liturgy?
Ennio Morricone
A very nice profile in Zenit on a man who would be on my short list, were I in the position to do some commissioning, to write liturgical music.
THIS really struck me:
Very funny, and very apt - turning back the clock!
I am surprised in the discussion of The Mission score that the Veni Creator doesn't come up.
THIS really struck me:
We turn to the subject of another keen musician: Pope Benedict XVI. Morricone says he has a "very good opinion" of the Holy Father. "He seems to me to be a very high minded Pope, a man of great culture and also great strength," he says. He is particularly complimentary about Benedict XVI's efforts to reform the liturgy -- a subject about which Morricone feels very strongly.
"Today the Church has made a big mistake, turning the clock back 500 years with guitars and popular songs," he argues. "I don't like it at all. Gregorian Chant is a vital and important tradition of the Church and to waste this by having kids mix religious words with profane, Western songs is hugely grave, hugely grave."
He says it's turning the clock back because the same thing happened before the Council of Trent when singers mixed profanity with sacred music. "He [the Pope] is doing well to correct it," he says. "He should correct it with much more firmness. Some churches have taken heed [of his corrections], but others haven't."
Very funny, and very apt - turning back the clock!
I am surprised in the discussion of The Mission score that the Veni Creator doesn't come up.
No one from the Vatican ever drops in at my house....
This is a good thing, because I am a slob.
(The Pope, in particular, would have difficulty find a place to sit down where his having done so would not afterwards be utterly obvious, white cassocks show the dust so...)
But the fact remains, I am a practicing, registered Catholic, trying to lead a holy life and find my way home to heaven -- yet never once has anyone from the Roman curia threatened me with a visitation.
Or told me, none too subtly, that they were "checking in" on me to "see how you're doing."
And I've missed Mass. And published, (IRL, not on a blog,) harangues about Church spokesmen. And generally been less than saintly.
So why is Sr Schneiders expecting unwelcome houseguests?
Is it, because, O horrors! she's a"progressive" and so it's a witch-hunt?
But Teddy Kennedy was a progressive, and I don't think any Roman congregation ever sent a delegation to check up on him.
Oh, but perhaps that's because he was a man, so their targeting you is some kind of paternalism? so, we should assume that the meanies at the Vatican sent investigators after Rosemary Radford Ruether?
No?
Hmmm...hy would anyone think that you were subject to some authority? and might even welcome interest from them?
Can you think of any reason for that Sr. Scneiders? some idea why anyone might think that he or she had a claim on you friendship? and maybe even on your obedience?
And one last question, that opinion piece in the NCR? You said:
One of your commentators had an intriguing response:
Frankly, I am not sure what the visitation is about, or if there is any reason those who don't want to be visited can't simply say, "no."
What would the consequences be for them?
What is the hold on them that the congregation that has ordered the visitations (there are 2, are there not, in the works?) has?
And this is a perfectly sincere question -- how is the life reduces to the essentials Sr Schneiders describes different from that of any single, chaste Catholic, with a life dedicated to service?
What does "community" mean to them, and what prevents them doing as they please?
(The Pope, in particular, would have difficulty find a place to sit down where his having done so would not afterwards be utterly obvious, white cassocks show the dust so...)
But the fact remains, I am a practicing, registered Catholic, trying to lead a holy life and find my way home to heaven -- yet never once has anyone from the Roman curia threatened me with a visitation.
Or told me, none too subtly, that they were "checking in" on me to "see how you're doing."
And I've missed Mass. And published, (IRL, not on a blog,) harangues about Church spokesmen. And generally been less than saintly.
So why is Sr Schneiders expecting unwelcome houseguests?
Is it, because, O horrors! she's a"progressive" and so it's a witch-hunt?
But Teddy Kennedy was a progressive, and I don't think any Roman congregation ever sent a delegation to check up on him.
Oh, but perhaps that's because he was a man, so their targeting you is some kind of paternalism? so, we should assume that the meanies at the Vatican sent investigators after Rosemary Radford Ruether?
No?
Hmmm...hy would anyone think that you were subject to some authority? and might even welcome interest from them?
Can you think of any reason for that Sr. Scneiders? some idea why anyone might think that he or she had a claim on you friendship? and maybe even on your obedience?
And one last question, that opinion piece in the NCR? You said:
Liturgy is increasingly oppressive when it is not completely unavailable.What did you mean by that?
One of your commentators had an intriguing response:
one question has arisen repeatedly, in various forms, and been “answered,” sometimes quite dogmatically, by people who have no lived experience of or academic competence in regard to Religious Life. Since the question is important, misinformation is not helpful to Religious themselves or to their many concerned lay friends, colleagues, and associates. The substance of the question is “What is ‘apostolic Religious Life’?”
This assumes and presumes much. First it assumes much about the interlocutors. A surprising number of us have been in, or in close proximity to, religious life. Many of us have looked at it very carefully indeed at times of discerning our own vocations.
Second, it presumes that the laity has little or no business commenting upon what forms of institutionalized religious life should be promoted or even tolerated by the Church.
I suspect that Sister Sandra would not minimize the role of non-priestly opinion were the matter under discussion, for example, the ordination of women.
Living situations in a first world urban culture are not conducive to flexible and mobile community in mission nor supportive of shared spirituality. Liturgy is increasingly oppressive when it is not completely unavailable.I find the reference to Liturgy as unavailable somewhat odd; the active laity, by and large, seem to manage it. Indeed, in my living area had I the inclination to do so I could without major inconvenience attend Liturgy on a daily basis prior to arriving at my (very secular) place of employment.
But overall what distresses me about Sister Sandra's essay is the suggestion that practices such as living in community and the observation of at least an abbreviated version of the Divine Office to be irrelevant.
With regard to the Hours, the suggestion that it and a personal spirituality and prayer life are somehow mutually exclusive is incorrect; one is not a substitute for the other. St. Benedict knew that well.
Similarly the role of community life ought not to be minimized. Sr. Sandra, however, seems to regard it, and the aspects inherent to same (i.e., shared preparation and clean-up of meals) as mere inconveniences. I would suggest though, that effective daily community life, in both the sacred and the mundane is a significant anodyne to the challenges that celibacy brings.
To some extent it would seem a chicken-and-egg scenario. Religious sisters (and brothers) today have made decisions to pursue less collective or consolidated and more individualistic missions which are not nearly so conducive to community life and prayer as were more cohesive missions such as the staffing of a school adjacent to an on-site community dwelling or convent.
While the popular culture has become a more "do your own thing" proposition, so has religious life. Sister Sandra would, from the tone of her essay, have us believe that that is a good thing.
It is not, however, without its costs. I believe that we should not be so quick to trivialize what has been lost. This is especially so in light of the difficulty religious congregations have had in attracting and retaining young talent. Is it possible that such talent was nurtured by the very community life which no longer exists?
It should be noted that probably a majority of the now-aging religious who've stuck around to "do their own thing" and who no longer live and pray in community or participate in any sort of regularized regimens are old enough to have had a decade or more of "formation" in which they did just that, participating in a shared mission to boot.
It is often noted how many religious have "left" the orders and gone out into the secular world as laity, to marry and to raise families. It would appear that many who have "stayed" have really "left" insofar as they have made decisions (and been allowed to make decisions) which have in essence taken them out of the day-to-day life in their communities.
Perhaps it isn't quite so trendy these days to subordinate ones own inclinations and ambitions for a shared purpose. To, for example, join a religious order whose mission is to staff K through 12 schools and to be content with 50 or so years of doing just that, with perhaps a graduate degree or two to enhance one's abilities to do same along the way, at a time not of one's own choosing but which corresponds to community needs.
Perhaps, too, it is not trendy to say "gee, that job in Podunk looks like it would be perfect for me, but there is no community within my order there to act as a home base, and I'm committed to life in community so I can't just take the job because I feel like doing so."
When there is little to distinguish one's life as a sister or brother from that of a single person living a life of professional service to the World, one begins to wonder what the difference really is. Are religious orders to be nothing more than glorified "Support Groups" with whom one meets periodically? Or perhaps a bit of a financial back-stop such that if one gets cross-wise with the local bishop and gets fired over a matter of conscience, one doesn't end up homeless and without health insurance (no small matter, in today's climate!)?
These aren't new questions. But they are hard ones, and serious ones.
Perhaps the "new" model of religious life is working for Sr. Sandra and her fellows.
Perhaps there really is no alternative, there not being very much left of "conventional" religious community life unless one wants to go the ultra-orthodox route.
In any case, it's what we've got, as a product of decisions which were made by religious and to some extent for religious over the the past several decades.
But a number of commentators, "qualified" according to Sr. Sandra's standards or not, still question whether the signs point to the new status quo being an improvement over the old one, and whether much of the good was tossed out with the bad along the way.
Frankly, I am not sure what the visitation is about, or if there is any reason those who don't want to be visited can't simply say, "no."
What would the consequences be for them?
What is the hold on them that the congregation that has ordered the visitations (there are 2, are there not, in the works?) has?
And this is a perfectly sincere question -- how is the life reduces to the essentials Sr Schneiders describes different from that of any single, chaste Catholic, with a life dedicated to service?
What does "community" mean to them, and what prevents them doing as they please?
Friday, 11 September 2009
I dunno... do you think your liturgy should be informed by your faith?
A Catholic musician voices a concern at Canticanova:
A disregard for rubrics?
Irreverence?
Ignorance of Catholic culture outside the Mass? (the lacunae in my experience and knowledge until shortly before I began my current position was shameful.)
A lack of knowledge as to, or even an indifference to, the liturgical theology that governs what priority should be given various musical, (or potentially musical) portions of the Mass?
In any case, in theory I have no objection to a non-Catholic musical director in a Catholic parish, given general competence, and a respect for and limitless curiosity about and willingness to comply with the requirements of Catholic liturgy.
Gary Penkala replies:
One is that there are plenty of Catholic musicians and liturgists who are abysmally uninformed as to what the Catholic Church teaches about, and requires of Her music.
But that one's small, as elephants go. The next is enormous, even by elephant standards.
And that is that people who do not hold what the Church holds and teaches are nonetheless have been permitted to dictate the expression of those teachings, to write the words we pray in our liturgies, with, judging by the inadequate, misleading and sometimes flat-out erroneous theology to be found in the "Hymnals of Record," virtually no oversight.
That is why the Parish Book of Catholic Hymns, an on-going project provoking much discussion over at the CMAA boards, is potentially so valuable a development.
(I am also pleased for that acknowledgment that hymns are going nowhere, and have a valid place in our liturgies.)
When the music director position at our church opened a couple of years ago, our pastor hired a non-Catholic to fill the position. As a cantor and choir director, I was open to the idea at first. However, with experience, I now believe hiring non-Catholic music directors to be incongruent with the practice of our faith. The religious beliefs of the music director eventually surface in many different ways, both inside and outside the liturgy.I am curious, since the writer explicitly says "in many different ways", as to how they surfaced, in addition to, indubitably, the choice of texts to be sung.
A disregard for rubrics?
Irreverence?
Ignorance of Catholic culture outside the Mass? (the lacunae in my experience and knowledge until shortly before I began my current position was shameful.)
A lack of knowledge as to, or even an indifference to, the liturgical theology that governs what priority should be given various musical, (or potentially musical) portions of the Mass?
In any case, in theory I have no objection to a non-Catholic musical director in a Catholic parish, given general competence, and a respect for and limitless curiosity about and willingness to comply with the requirements of Catholic liturgy.
Gary Penkala replies:
Situations like you describe can be very different one from another, and making general statements about them is often difficult. Obviously, all things being equal, a parish should hire a practicing, faithful Catholic as music director. One would expect the music director to be qualified in both Catholic music and liturgy, and if the situation warrants, to be competent in organ playing and choral conducting....I cannot argue, and this is a conversation I have heard more than once, but there are two elephants in the room eavesdropping.However, other circumstances may influence a decision. Perhaps no Catholics applied. Perhaps the Catholics who may have applied were not competent in other areas (organ, directing, etc). In such cases a decision must be made: hire a non-competent Catholic musician or hire a non-Catholic competent musician.
That being said, it should not be taken lightly that a non-Catholic in an authority position in a Catholic parish will be at a distinct disadvantage. Much research, training, patience, humility and flexibility would be required in order to learn and appreciate Catholic liturgy and music. It's definitely not an easy task, especially for someone who has chosen (either directly or through family tradition) to "protest" the Catholic faith.
If, as a pastor, I were faced with the prospect of no music at all, or of hiring a non-Catholic to oversee the program, I'm not sure what I would do.
One is that there are plenty of Catholic musicians and liturgists who are abysmally uninformed as to what the Catholic Church teaches about, and requires of Her music.
But that one's small, as elephants go. The next is enormous, even by elephant standards.
And that is that people who do not hold what the Church holds and teaches are nonetheless have been permitted to dictate the expression of those teachings, to write the words we pray in our liturgies, with, judging by the inadequate, misleading and sometimes flat-out erroneous theology to be found in the "Hymnals of Record," virtually no oversight.
That is why the Parish Book of Catholic Hymns, an on-going project provoking much discussion over at the CMAA boards, is potentially so valuable a development.
(I am also pleased for that acknowledgment that hymns are going nowhere, and have a valid place in our liturgies.)
Thursday, 10 September 2009
Theramin!
Hey!
If you have Ovation on your cable, turn it on, right now!
(Sorry, I can't help it, I'm bossy....)
If you have Ovation on your cable, turn it on, right now!
(Sorry, I can't help it, I'm bossy....)
Metanoia
A most remarkable story of conversion, "conversion" both in that universally necessary sense, a continuing process of turning toward the Lord that we must all, or should all, commit to; and in that personal history way of bouncing, if not to formal membership in one denomination to another, at least to one pattern of practice from another.
I sometimes step back and try to remember, how did I get from here to there as I realize that I have lost all track of the clock in the 2nd greatest timesuck known to man -- from discussion of the CMAA hymnal to the Cherubic Hymn to the necessity or otherwise of professional church musicians to Orthodox liturgical music to one man's tale of finding God.
But I digress.
Although there is scarcely a concrete detail of our respective journeys we have in common, I read this and recognized myself:
But that sudden moment of knowing why -- and why what else you might have been doing or experiencing isn't just different, but wrong?
Amazingly, beautifully painful.
I sometimes step back and try to remember, how did I get from here to there as I realize that I have lost all track of the clock in the 2nd greatest timesuck known to man -- from discussion of the CMAA hymnal to the Cherubic Hymn to the necessity or otherwise of professional church musicians to Orthodox liturgical music to one man's tale of finding God.
But I digress.
Although there is scarcely a concrete detail of our respective journeys we have in common, I read this and recognized myself:
Part of that experience was intellectual: We who mystically represent the Cherubim sing the thrice holy hymn to the life giving Trinity . . .Although my moment of comprehension did not occur at Divine Liturgy, it wasn't even at liturgy, it wasn't even while at prayer.That’s when I “got it,” when my head began to follow my heart, then led my heart into even deeper transformation. I knew then, why we were there, and why we were not. I understood what worship truly meant.
We who mystically represent the Cherubim sing the thrice holy hymn to the life giving Trinity . . .
I had then such a deep understanding of worship that I didn’t need to inquire or wonder, because here was what I had been so shaken by at Mass, what had been so painfully absent after Vatican II, what I had been seeking for decades. And that understanding gave birth to what I can only describe as waves of awe and wonder at the power and majesty of God as I continued to hang onto ever word I heard.
But that sudden moment of knowing why -- and why what else you might have been doing or experiencing isn't just different, but wrong?
Amazingly, beautifully painful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
