No federal dollars will be used to fund abortions.
Universalis, your very own breviary in pixels...
Wednesday, 9 September 2009
Wedding Policies
Courtesy of the wonderful M J Ballou, get a gander at this remarkably detailed, diocese-wide wedding policy from Lansing.
How'd ya like to know that THAT O of W had your back, next time you next time you came up against a Momzilla asking for "Child of Mine," or a B & G that fell in love to the strains of John Williams' Imperial March?
How'd ya like to know that THAT O of W had your back, next time you next time you came up against a Momzilla asking for "Child of Mine," or a B & G that fell in love to the strains of John Williams' Imperial March?
Conjugal Duties, or a Good Man is Hard to Find
I heard from a spokesman for my spouse.
Everything is good, but Himself is tired of feeling "obliged" to murmur sweet nothings -- the gist is, I know he loves me, so why should he have to say it?
The rest of what his representative had to say:
Oh, wait, my bad.
It wasn't a representative of MY husband, it was the representative of another Spouse, who said these things, more or less, to Her Bridegroom:
Fr McBrien, it seems to me, is misrepresenting Church teaching on this, as on so many matters.
In which case, his boss, Christ's Holy Bride might want to consider letting him go.
If McBrien is really speaking for the Church, I would say some couples' counseling might be in order for Her and Christ, huh?
Everything is good, but Himself is tired of feeling "obliged" to murmur sweet nothings -- the gist is, I know he loves me, so why should he have to say it?
The rest of what his representative had to say:
The practice of telling your wife that you love her began in the 12th century, when committed love was widely rejected by courtly cads, or misunderstood by poorly educated peasant men.
Husbands saw saying “I love you,” as a way of reaffirming their commitment to their wives and of promoting renewed devotion to them.
However, as time went on, saying loving things drifted further and further away from its grounding in love itself.
Notwithstanding my Dad’s personal endorsement of telling Mom he loved her, and the sporadic restoration of the practice in this suburd and elsewhere, it is difficult to speak favorably about verbal proofs of devotion today.
Now that most women are literate and even well-educated, there is little or no need for extraneous spoken reminders of a spouse's commitment.
His just being there ought to be proof enough.
Saying “I love you, honey”, constantly or not, is a step backward in your relationship, not forward.
Oh, wait, my bad.
It wasn't a representative of MY husband, it was the representative of another Spouse, who said these things, more or less, to Her Bridegroom:
The practice of eucharistic adoration began in the 12th century, when the Real Presence of Christ was widely rejected by heretics or misunderstood by poorly educated Catholics. The church saw eucharistic adoration as a way of reaffirming its faith in the Real Presence and of promoting renewed devotion to it.
However, as time went on, eucharistic devotions, including adoration, drifted further and further away from their liturgical grounding in the Mass itself.
Notwithstanding Pope Benedict XVI's personal endorsement of eucharistic adoration and the sporadic restoration of the practice in the archdiocese of Boston and elsewhere, it is difficult to speak favorably about the devotion today.
Now that most Catholics are literate and even well-educated, the Mass is in the language of the people (i.e, the vernacular), and its rituals are relatively easy to understand and follow, there is little or no need for extraneous eucharistic devotions. The Mass itself provides all that a Catholic needs sacramentally and spiritually.
Eucharistic adoration, perpetual or not, is a doctrinal, theological, and spiritual step backward, not forward.
Fr McBrien, it seems to me, is misrepresenting Church teaching on this, as on so many matters.
In which case, his boss, Christ's Holy Bride might want to consider letting him go.
If McBrien is really speaking for the Church, I would say some couples' counseling might be in order for Her and Christ, huh?
Tuesday, 8 September 2009
All the Pluripotent Stem Cell Scientists Could Ever Use....
Unwanted the owner, the only person who should actually have a say in whether they can be harvested and made us of, that is, to the human being OF WHOM THE CELLS ARE AN ACTUAL PART.
Yes, existing in massive quantities, and possessed by someone who is positively eager, is aching to rid himself of them: fat .
Yes, existing in massive quantities, and possessed by someone who is positively eager, is aching to rid himself of them: fat .
So let's see how those who champion ESCR react to this news -- will they give up their destructive and anti-life machinations, since there is no need to end lives to acquire new cell lines?Scientists at Stanford University School of Medicine have discovered that the millions of fat cells removed during liposuction can be easily and quickly turned into induced pluripotent stem cells, or iPS cells, more easily than the skin cells that researchers used when the first iPS cells were created in 2007.
These iPS cells, like stem cells derived from embryos, can be turned into many different kinds of cells, and researchers believe they eventually could be used to regenerate tissue for organs and repair damage.
Embryonic stem cells are controversial because the embryos are destroyed when the stem cells are removed for research. The iPS cells, which have many of the same basic properties, do not raise the same ethical questions as embryonic stem cells because they come from skin or now fat cells that have been reprogrammed to go back in time, so to speak, and have the ability to turn into any other kind of cell in the body.
A Book Recommendation
For those looking to get a jump on the new translations, or just to give themselves a refresher course on the whats and whys of the Order of Mass, or perhaps to have a good outline for a course of study to catechize others (your students, your family, your parishioners,) on the Mass -- here's the book for you.
Nicely written, sensibly and cleverly organized, very accessible, thorough without becoming bogged down -- I unreservedly recommend it.
If only She had some universal language, and music, and practices...
A new "musical musing" at CNP, in response to a reader's query/complaint, which spoke of a liturgical musician's perceived need to "align Catholic and American heritage":
Mr Penkala can be counted upon.
Some of the rhetoric we've been hearing lately deals with the overall attitude and alignment regarding a simple phrase: how we label the Church in this country. Many (including the editors and staff here at CNP) would be very wary of a label that comes close to yours ("America's Catholic Church"); similarly, people speak of an "American Catholic Church." We would argue that there is one Catholic Church in the world, many dioceses of which lie within the geographical confines of the U.S. There is not a separate or distinct American Catholic Church, or Canadian Catholic Church, or even Italian Catholic Church. Only one. Our preferred label (and that of the official Church) to describe the dioceses in America would be: The Catholic Church in the United States.
It's perhaps a nit-picky argument, but labels can be slanted and ideological — witness "anti-choice" or "pro-life," labeling the same group.
When viewed as the Catholic Church in America, we don't need to make huge efforts to "inculturate." We are first Roman Catholics, and only secondly celebrating Mass with some American customs and music. Realize that it would be entirely possible, given that the Novus Ordo can be celebrated completely in Latin, for a typical Ordinary Form Mass in the U.S. to be indistinguishable from a Mass in Canada, Ireland, Australia or the U.K. (apart from the local accents during the English readings and homily), particularly if the music was Gregorian chant.
In terms of guitar and piano accompaniments, we must realize that neither popularity nor widespread use makes a notion "correct" or even "appropriate." Guitar and piano (and I might add other instruments like clarinet ensembles and accordion bands and bagpipes) are not seen by the Vatican as being proper to the Roman Rite. On an even more basic note, certain musical styles are proper for certain milieus: Gregorian chant is not proper at a nightclub, a polka band is not proper at a high school graduation, Broadway styles are not proper in church.
These ideas about what is proper to the Roman Rite are not at all arbitrary — they're in Vatican documents, which unfortunately have often been summarily ignored by musicians and pastors who happen to disagree with them.
Use of Gregorian Chant
The church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services [Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy par.116].
Use of the Pipe Organ
The pipe organ is to be held in high esteem, for it is the traditional musical instrument which adds a wonderful splendor to the Church's ceremonies and powerfully lifts up man's mind to God and to higher things [Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy par.120].
While the organ is considered suited to the Roman Rite, the "chorale" or "hymn" is not. The Church gives us what are called the Propers of the Mass for our use. These are texts for every celebration of the Church year for the Entrance, Offertory and Communion times. Associated with these texts is the music (Gregorian chant) that the Church links to them, found in official books like the Graduale Romanum and Graduale simplex. As an example, the Gregorian chant Introit, Ad te levavi ("I lift up my soul"), is given as the proper entrance music on the First Sunday of Advent. Any other music that we use is a substitution for this premier option. One can see how far afield we've come in the U.S. when the substitution (i.e. a "hymn" or "praise song") has become the norm — and all this with many pastors and certainly the largest part of the congregation not even knowing the situation.
I would suggest that if you really want to know what the Catholic Church teaches about music, that you read directly the pertinent documents from Rome:
Gary Penkala
- Vatican II's Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy (1963)
- Musicam sacram (1967)
- The General Instruction on the Roman Missal [GIRM] (2002)
- Chirograph on Sacred Music (2003)
- Redemptionis Sacramentum (2004)
- Sacramentum caritatis (2007)
Mr Penkala can be counted upon.
Sunday, 6 September 2009
The Constitutional Right to Rocky Road, or Why Snacks are More Important Than God
I don't know what is the matter with me, but stories like this usually light a fire under me, today -- profound depression and a well, whadya expect nowadays? hopelessness.
Three churches have filed a lawsuit against the city of Phoenix, charging that its noise ordinance which prohibits the ringing of their church bells is unconstitutional and suppresses a long American tradition. One pastor was sentenced to jail for violating the ordinance, which allows an exception for ice cream trucks but not for churches.
Saturday, 29 August 2009
The Song We NEED, Rather Than Want
Quoting myself, in a combox at Mara Joy's, who, like virtually all chief-pickers-or-songs-at-Mass, is dismayed at the flatness, the thinness, the sameness, the banality, the redundancy of the texts of the hymns with which, for various reasons, we are stuck, as opposed to the wealth, sitting there untapped, of the propers.
We do sing praise, praise, happy, happy most of the time.
My "default" for many liturgies whose introit strikes a tone similar to today's is "There's a Wideness in God's Mercy," (which, IIRC, I needed to teach my congregation, as they had no text in their repertoire that addressed the need for mercy,) but even that states the sinner's receipt as a fait accompli rather than us having the humility and good sense to actually ASK for God's mercy.
The more immersed in Liturgy I become (and the progression through the psalms in the LotH is GREAT for teaching this,) the more I need to say or sing all those different things which the psalms encompass, often vastly different from verse to verse in a single psalm.
Such prayer becomes a process rather than a moment.
The Hymn Sandwich leaves us so theologically impoverished!
There are theologically profound hymns, of course, but they are not the ones that achieve Top Ten status, (they're not the ones people ask for, the ones they want,) and in the utilitarian practice of only singing the number of verses necessary to get from point a (in time or space,) to point b, we seldom enjoy their richness even when we do sing them.
The general instruction for the LotH has something about the desirability of using the appointed psalms even if they don't fit your current mood or perceived needs.
I suspect the psalms we resist, are the ones we most need to pray.
We do sing praise, praise, happy, happy most of the time.
My "default" for many liturgies whose introit strikes a tone similar to today's is "There's a Wideness in God's Mercy," (which, IIRC, I needed to teach my congregation, as they had no text in their repertoire that addressed the need for mercy,) but even that states the sinner's receipt as a fait accompli rather than us having the humility and good sense to actually ASK for God's mercy.
The more immersed in Liturgy I become (and the progression through the psalms in the LotH is GREAT for teaching this,) the more I need to say or sing all those different things which the psalms encompass, often vastly different from verse to verse in a single psalm.
Such prayer becomes a process rather than a moment.
The Hymn Sandwich leaves us so theologically impoverished!
There are theologically profound hymns, of course, but they are not the ones that achieve Top Ten status, (they're not the ones people ask for, the ones they want,) and in the utilitarian practice of only singing the number of verses necessary to get from point a (in time or space,) to point b, we seldom enjoy their richness even when we do sing them.
The general instruction for the LotH has something about the desirability of using the appointed psalms even if they don't fit your current mood or perceived needs.
I suspect the psalms we resist, are the ones we most need to pray.
Thursday, 27 August 2009
"Wanted or Unwanted, Human Life, Even at its Earliest Stages, Has Rights"
I wish I knew the source of this 30-some year old letter, which is suddenly all over the blogosphere -- did the original recently come into someone new's hands and so it came to light? is it referenced in a footnoted book? has it always been part of the public record?
When my uncle was in the Senate there was no question that a man could be a Democrat with prospects, yet remain a faithful, observant Catholic.
It is more problematic now.
From a letter to Mr. Thomas Donnelly of Great Neck, NY, dated August 3, 1971.Rest in peace.Dear Mr. Donnelly:I appreciate your letter containing your views on abortion. There are many moral and legal aspects arising from this complex issue which is gaining the acceptance of large numbers of women faced with unwanted pregnancies, while disturbing the consciences of a great many other Americans.
Opponents maintain that abortion is wrong from every theological, moral and medical aspect. Proponents are firmly convinced that the woman, alone, has the right to decide.
While the deep concern of a woman bearing an unwanted child merits consideration and sympathy, it is my personal feeling that the legalization of abortion on demand is not in accordance with the value which our civilization places on human life. Wanted or unwanted, I believe that human life, even at its earliest stages, has certain rights which must be recognized -- the right to be born, the right to love, the right to grow old.
On the question of the individual's freedom of choice there are easily available birth control methods and information which women may employ to prevent or postpone pregnancy. But once life has begun, no matter at what stage of growth, it is my belief that termination should not be decided merely by desire.
I share the confidence of those who feel that America is willing to care for its unwanted as well as wanted children, protecting particularly those who cannot protect themselves. i also share the opinions of those who do not accept abortion as a response to our society's problems -- an inadequate welfare system, unsatisfactory job training programs, and insufficient financial support for all its citizens.
When history looks back to this era it should recognize this generation as one which cared about human beings enough to halt the practice of war, to provide a decent living for every family, and to fulfill its responsibility to its children from the very moment of conception.
Sincerely,
Edward M. Kennedy
When my uncle was in the Senate there was no question that a man could be a Democrat with prospects, yet remain a faithful, observant Catholic.
It is more problematic now.
In Support of the Sung Mass
Sing the text.
SING it.
Why?
Culled from a combox, a gem, an absolute gem from Aristotle:
Why, indeed....
(If I were editing it for posterity, I'd re-phrase to "... why would you mutter..." Maybe I'll embroider it on a sampler to hang over the doorway of the room where the Dread LitCom meets ;o))
SING it.
Why?
Culled from a combox, a gem, an absolute gem from Aristotle:
If “singing is for lovers,” why ought we mutter “and also with you” at the Wedding Feast of the Lamb?
Why, indeed....
(If I were editing it for posterity, I'd re-phrase to "... why would you mutter..." Maybe I'll embroider it on a sampler to hang over the doorway of the room where the Dread LitCom meets ;o))
That Letter to the Editor from Bishop Hope
Thanks to Fr Martin over at America Magazine for the complete text of Westminster's gentle rebuke to the editors of the Tablet:
I am writing with regard to your leader “The old rite put in its place” (8 August). In his message welcoming priests to the training conference provided by the Diocese of Westminster in conjunction with the Latin Mass Society, Archbishop Nichols expresses his gratitude to those priests who have given up their time to respond to a need in the Church today.
By providing this conference for priests wishing to learn the extraordinary rite, the Diocese of Westminster is not only affirming the import ance of the worthy celebration of the liturgy and the proper attention that priests should pay to good celebration but also reminding us that the diocesan bishop is the moderator, promoter and guardian of the whole of the diocese’s liturgical life. He is not “seeking to nip potential schism in the bud” or suggesting that the place of the Tridentine Rite is “necessarily marginal”.
Just as Pope Benedict pointed out in the letter he sent to the Church’s bishops to accompany “Summorum Pontificum”, so the archbishop notes the relationship between the ordinary and the extraordinary forms. Above all he emphasises the importance of the Mass as the “source and expression of the unity of the Church”. In this Year for Priests, Archbishop Vincent recognises the responsibility priests face whatever the form the liturgy takes – the active participation of all. This is an idea, common to papal teaching on the liturgy from the beginning of the twentieth century. This “active participation” has always been understood to be internal and external. To reduce participation to solely external signs is both a simplification and a misguided attack in the “culture wars” you seek to avoid.
(Bishop) Alan Hopes, Auxiliary Bishop of Westminster, London SW1
Cherry picking some points from the CARA survey and report
Me, I'm doing the cherry picking, I am not accusing the "liberal mainstream media" or the "right-wing blogosphere."
I am noting some points and commenting on them, teasing out for my own understanding the facts as presented by the CARA survey.
Although the Mass in Latin is now more widely available, results of a survey conducted by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) indicates that interest is not widespread among adult Catholics in the United States.
Well, sad truth be told, interest in any Mass "is not widespread among adult Catholics in the United States."
Asked if they favored bringing back the Tridentine Mass for those who would prefer it, the results were:
Favor - 25%
Oppose - 12%
No opinion -63%
In other words, 88% have no objection to the EF being available. Unfortunately, a large part of that anti-choice 12% own their own miters and crosiers...
In the CARA poll, 63 percent of respondents said they had “no opinion” about
bringing back the Latin Mass and ...in the 1985 Gallup poll, only 25 percent of adult Catholics had “no opinion” about bringing back the Latin Mass.
So the numbers of the ambivalent pretty well reflect the numbers of those who can't be bothered to practice the Faith on a regular basis.
In the 1985 Gallup poll, only 25 percent of adult Catholics had “no opinion”
about bringing back the Latin Mass. ... The percentage of Catholics who “oppose” the return of the Latin Mass dropped from 35 percent in 1985 to only 12 percent in 2008.
So, in 1985, those who wanted the old Mass available out numbered those who opposed it by a ratio of 8:7.
Now, this ratio has increased to more than 14:7.
So among those with an interest one way or the other, those favoring the availability of the EF has grown enormously.
The statistics by "generation" are interesting -- those with the irrational fear of the EF are obviously aging:
Pre-Vatican II (born before 1943) Favor:30% No Opinion:46 % Oppose:24%
Vatican II (born 1943-60) Favor:32 % No Opinion:55% Oppose:13%
Post-Vatican II (born 1961-81) Favor:21% No Opinion:72% Oppose:7%
Millennial (born 1982 or later) Favor:16% No Opinion:78% Oppose:6%
And approval of the celebrating the EF is greater among the better educated, those who think for themselves, and women than in the general population; its celebration favored by
19% of those with a high school degree or less, but
43% [!!!] of those with graduate degrees;
27% of Republicans,
24% of Democrats, but
37% of Independents, 3rd Party Members, or the apolitical;
and perhaps strangest of all, (for we know that the old Mass and the spirituality it represents, oppresses women, :oP))
23% of men, but
28% of women.
Three in ten Catholics who do not “oppose” bringing back the Latin Mass say
they would attend such a Latin Mass if it was readily available at convenient times and locations. This is equivalent to about one in ten adult Catholics (11 percent overall) or approximately 5.7 million individuals.
But, only about one in every 250 parishes regularly offer a Mass in Latin.
Got that?
You do that math -- one out of every 10 would like to do what only one in every 250 has the regular opportunity to do.
I have said it before, my first choice would not be the EF -- but how can any honest person claim that the legitimate aspirations of the faithful are being accommodated in regard to the Latin Mass?
And until they are, and until the Mass of Blessed John XXII, with whatever its evangelical and catechetical powers be, is allowed the opportunity to exert its influences on that vast sea of opinionless, in far too many cases unpracticing, putative Catholics -- how can anyone opposing its availability and in some case actively working against it, claim to have the best interest of the People of God at heart?
I am noting some points and commenting on them, teasing out for my own understanding the facts as presented by the CARA survey.
Although the Mass in Latin is now more widely available, results of a survey conducted by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) indicates that interest is not widespread among adult Catholics in the United States.
Well, sad truth be told, interest in any Mass "is not widespread among adult Catholics in the United States."
Asked if they favored bringing back the Tridentine Mass for those who would prefer it, the results were:
Favor - 25%
Oppose - 12%
No opinion -63%
In other words, 88% have no objection to the EF being available. Unfortunately, a large part of that anti-choice 12% own their own miters and crosiers...
In the CARA poll, 63 percent of respondents said they had “no opinion” about
bringing back the Latin Mass and ...in the 1985 Gallup poll, only 25 percent of adult Catholics had “no opinion” about bringing back the Latin Mass.
So the numbers of the ambivalent pretty well reflect the numbers of those who can't be bothered to practice the Faith on a regular basis.
In the 1985 Gallup poll, only 25 percent of adult Catholics had “no opinion”
about bringing back the Latin Mass. ... The percentage of Catholics who “oppose” the return of the Latin Mass dropped from 35 percent in 1985 to only 12 percent in 2008.
So, in 1985, those who wanted the old Mass available out numbered those who opposed it by a ratio of 8:7.
Now, this ratio has increased to more than 14:7.
So among those with an interest one way or the other, those favoring the availability of the EF has grown enormously.
The statistics by "generation" are interesting -- those with the irrational fear of the EF are obviously aging:
Pre-Vatican II (born before 1943) Favor:30% No Opinion:46 % Oppose:24%
Vatican II (born 1943-60) Favor:32 % No Opinion:55% Oppose:13%
Post-Vatican II (born 1961-81) Favor:21% No Opinion:72% Oppose:7%
Millennial (born 1982 or later) Favor:16% No Opinion:78% Oppose:6%
And approval of the celebrating the EF is greater among the better educated, those who think for themselves, and women than in the general population; its celebration favored by
19% of those with a high school degree or less, but
43% [!!!] of those with graduate degrees;
27% of Republicans,
24% of Democrats, but
37% of Independents, 3rd Party Members, or the apolitical;
and perhaps strangest of all, (for we know that the old Mass and the spirituality it represents, oppresses women, :oP))
23% of men, but
28% of women.
Three in ten Catholics who do not “oppose” bringing back the Latin Mass say
they would attend such a Latin Mass if it was readily available at convenient times and locations. This is equivalent to about one in ten adult Catholics (11 percent overall) or approximately 5.7 million individuals.
But, only about one in every 250 parishes regularly offer a Mass in Latin.
Got that?
You do that math -- one out of every 10 would like to do what only one in every 250 has the regular opportunity to do.
I have said it before, my first choice would not be the EF -- but how can any honest person claim that the legitimate aspirations of the faithful are being accommodated in regard to the Latin Mass?
And until they are, and until the Mass of Blessed John XXII, with whatever its evangelical and catechetical powers be, is allowed the opportunity to exert its influences on that vast sea of opinionless, in far too many cases unpracticing, putative Catholics -- how can anyone opposing its availability and in some case actively working against it, claim to have the best interest of the People of God at heart?
Wednesday, 26 August 2009
Dang...
.. that re-formatting that I did (of the evil PDF format) of the CARA survey didn't work at ALL!!!!
CARA on Interest in Latin Mass
http://cara.georgetown.edu/pr082409.pdf
The Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate
News release Contact: Mark Gray
August 24, 2009 202-687-0885
mmg34@georgetown.edu
Opinions about the Latin Mass have shifted over time
A Majority of adult Catholics express no opinion on return of older liturgy
Two years ago, Pope Benedict XVI gave permission for the 1962 Roman Rite
Mass to be used without a priest first acquiring a bishop’s approval.1 Using the Missal of John XXIII, this Mass is celebrated in Latin with the priest and parishioners facing the same direction toward the altar. It is the last version of the Latin Mass that was first codified following the Council of Trent in the 16th century and is thus often referred to as the Latin Tridentine Mass.2 Parish priests have been instructed by the Pope to work with parishioners when there is a “stable group” who are interested in Latin Mass to provide opportunities for this liturgy to be celebrated regularly under the guidance of their bishop. According to the Mass Times Trust, operators of the popular website, www.masstimes.org, about one in every 250 parishes regularly offer a Mass in Latin in the 117,000 parishes for which listings are available (in more than 200 countries).
Although the Mass in Latin is now more widely available, results of a survey conducted by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA) indicates that interest is not widespread among adult Catholics in the United States. Instead, it appears that the wider availability of the Latin Mass may have come too late to appeal to the majority of Catholics today who have no memory or experience of this older form of the liturgy.As you may be aware, Pope Benedict XVI recently eased restrictions on the use of the older Latin Tridentine Mass, as celebrated just before the Second Vatican Council in the mid-1960’s.
Do you favor as an alternative to the newer Mass, bringing back the older
Latin Tridentine Mass for those who would prefer this option?
Favor 25%
Oppose 12
No opinion 63
A February 2008 CARA survey included questions replicating a series from a
1985 Gallup poll. The CARA questions are altered slightly to most accurately reflect
changing events.3 Both surveys utilized nationally representative samples of adult selfidentified Catholics who were asked whether they favor or oppose bringing back the older Latin Mass as an alternative to the newer liturgy.
In the CARA poll, 63 percent of respondents said they had “no opinion” about
bringing back the Latin Mass and those who “favor” bringing back the Latin Mass
outnumber those who “oppose” this by more than two to one (25 percent compared to 12 percent).
In the 1985 Gallup poll, only 25 percent of adult Catholics had “no opinion”
about bringing back the Latin Mass. By comparison, when restricting the CARA sample to those who are 41 or older, or those who would have been at least 18 years old in 1985, the “no opinion” response today was given by 57 percent. The percentage of Catholics who “oppose” the return of the Latin Mass dropped from 35 percent in 1985 to only 12 percent in 2008. Thus, opinions about the Latin Mass, either positive or negative, have appeared to weaken as time has passed.[graphic]
Among the strongest supporters for the return of the Latin Mass in 2008 are
weekly Mass attendees (33 percent favor its return). Yet even among these frequent
Mass attenders, nearly half (47 percent) still say they had “no opinion” and one in five (20 percent) “oppose” the wider availability of the Latin Mass.
As shown in the table below other groups who show more support the return of
the Latin Mass include older Catholics (born before 1961), those who have earned a
graduate degree, and political independents—including those leaning toward the
Republican Party.As you may be aware, Pope Benedict XVI recently eased restrictions
on the use of the older Latin Tridentine Mass, as celebrated just
before the Second Vatican Council in the mid-1960’s. Do you favor as an
alternative to the newer Mass, bringing back the older Latin Tridentine
Mass for those who would prefer this option?
Favor No opinion Oppose
Frequency of Mass Attendance
Weekly or more often 33% 47% 20%
Less than weekly, but at least monthly 29 58 13
A few times a year or less often 21 71 8
Catholic Generation
Pre-Vatican II (born before 1943) 30 46 24
Vatican II (born 1943-60) 32 55 13
Post-Vatican II (born 1961-81) 21 72 7
Millennial (born 1982 or later) 16 78 6
Education
High school or less 19 68 13
Some college 28 63 9
Bachelor’s degree 28 58 14
Graduate degree 43 45 12
Gender
Male 23 66 11
Female 28 60 12
Party Identification
Republican 27 59 14
Leans Republican 33 54 13
Independent/3rd Party/Apolitical 37 60 3
Leans Democrat 10 71 19
Democrat 24 64 12
Three in ten Catholics who do not “oppose” bringing back the Latin Mass say
they would attend such a Latin Mass if it was readily available at convenient times and locations. This is equivalent to about one in ten adult Catholics (11 percent overall) or approximately 5.7 million individuals.
If the Latin Tridentine Mass were made readily
available at convenient times and locations,
and you were able to attend, would you?
Respondents who “Favor” or have “No opinion” about
easing restrictions on the Latin Tridentine Mass
Yes 29%
No 25
No opinion 46
Among those who do not oppose the return of the Latin Mass, interest in
attending a Latin Mass is more likely among frequent Mass attendees. More than four in ten of these respondents, who attend Mass at least once a month, say they would attend a Latin Mass if it was available.
If the Latin Tridentine Mass were made readily
available at convenient times and locations,
and you were able to attend, would you?
available at convenient times and locations,
and you were able to attend, would you?
Respondents who “Favor” or have “No opinion” about
easing restrictions on the Latin Tridentine Mass
easing restrictions on the Latin Tridentine Mass
Mass Attendance
Weekly or more Less than weekly but at least once a month A few times a year or less
Yes 45% 42% 18%
No 20 16 30
No opinion 35 42 52
Survey Methods
The results above are from a February 2008 survey including the responses of
1,007 self-identified adult Catholics from Knowledge Networks large national panel of
households, which have been assembled by regular random telephone survey methods (probability sampling). A survey with this number of respondents has a margin of sampling error of ±3.1 percent. As a rule of thumb, every 1 percentage point of the total adult Catholic population is equivalent to approximately 500,000 persons.
Color me, er.... CGI me cautiously optimistic
I think short of Maurice Sendak's drawing actually coming to life, in 3D, this looks like the best way way for them to have gone, the best we could hope for with "Where the Wild Things Are" and I can't wait!
But some other images I'm seeing? not so evocative....
But some other images I'm seeing? not so evocative....
Well, we'll hope for the best.
Did you ever read Dear Mili? Wonderful, touching Wilhelm Grimm story, gentle lovely illustrations. I love Maurice Sendak's work, love it.
Did you ever read Dear Mili? Wonderful, touching Wilhelm Grimm story, gentle lovely illustrations. I love Maurice Sendak's work, love it.
Hard Sayings for the Hard-Core
I have so many questions.
Does this guy sympathize with or decry what the Pope is doing? (I honestly, on re-reading cannot tell; his lone commentator seems to find herself in the same boat. Or should I say, "the same Barque"?)
And what is a "hard-core Catholic"? Someone who actually believes what he claims to believe?
I've always wondered how Protestants, ("hard-core" Protestants? those who essentially define themselves negatively, that is, in opposition to the dogma of the Big Dog of Christianity?) deal with this past Sunday's Gospel. Actually, I wonder how they deal with John at all.
But the absence of a tag to the story, something like Jesus running after folks, wincing and smiling at the same time, No, no, ya got it all wrong, come back, it's a METAPHOR!, surely gives them pause?
Back to the column in The Trumpet, I don't find the author's digest of Benedict's... whoops, I was about to use the metaphor that gets me in trouble, I won't call them "ballsier" .... whoops, I just did, ignore that... I don't find the author's summation of Benedict's more in-your-face actions and words over the past few years inaccurate or unfair.
And for a non-Catholic he really seems to understand the radical position of the Eucharistic Liturgy, that it is the root of everything else, of its fundamental importance to every facet of the Church's mission.
And that his looking forward to Armageddon shares a bit too much of the emotion with which a child awaits Christmas.
Does this guy sympathize with or decry what the Pope is doing? (I honestly, on re-reading cannot tell; his lone commentator seems to find herself in the same boat. Or should I say, "the same Barque"?)
And what is a "hard-core Catholic"? Someone who actually believes what he claims to believe?
I've always wondered how Protestants, ("hard-core" Protestants? those who essentially define themselves negatively, that is, in opposition to the dogma of the Big Dog of Christianity?) deal with this past Sunday's Gospel. Actually, I wonder how they deal with John at all.
But the absence of a tag to the story, something like Jesus running after folks, wincing and smiling at the same time, No, no, ya got it all wrong, come back, it's a METAPHOR!, surely gives them pause?
Back to the column in The Trumpet, I don't find the author's digest of Benedict's... whoops, I was about to use the metaphor that gets me in trouble, I won't call them "ballsier" .... whoops, I just did, ignore that... I don't find the author's summation of Benedict's more in-your-face actions and words over the past few years inaccurate or unfair.
And for a non-Catholic he really seems to understand the radical position of the Eucharistic Liturgy, that it is the root of everything else, of its fundamental importance to every facet of the Church's mission.
The Pope’s Challenge to the FaithfulI do get the impression that he might think the Catholics are running interference for the "true" Church, and I would quibble with his characterization of the Holy Fathers actions as an attempt to "expel" the less orthodox.
Joel Hilliker
August 26, 2009 | From theTrumpet.com
“This saying is hard,” he says as he marches forward with his conservative agenda. “Will you also go away?”
Catholic priests are now encouraged to perform mass ad orientem—facing east, with their back to the people. ..
Pope Benedict xvi is leading the way, his back to the people, challenging them to keep up. Inside the church, he is continuing his decades-long campaign to expel liberals and stack the deck with conservatives. In Europe, he is working to reestablish a Catholic continent. Among non-Catholic Christians, he seeks to draw worshippers under papal authority. In the world, he is leveling a strong attack against secularism and godlessness. And to Islam, he has unmistakably shown a resistance, a toughness, that promises to grow stronger. He has repeatedly spoken out against those who would stand in his way, unafraid to offend, unafraid to turn opponents into enemies.
In March 2006, Ratzinger lashed out against European secularism—and Islam—with his book, Without Roots: The West, Relativism, Christianity, Islam. Co-authored with the president of the Italian Senate, it addressed the “advance of Islam” ...
In September, Pope Benedict traveled to his home state of Bavaria for a six-day visit where, among other things, he spoke with German President Horst Kohler about the dangers of Islamic penetration into German society. His most famous speech on that trip was a lecture at the University of Regensburg...
In March 2006, Pope Benedict xvi chose to drop “patriarch of the West” from his lengthy list of official titles and became merely “Bishop of Rome, vicar of Jesus Christ, successor of the prince of the apostles, supreme pontiff of the universal church, primate of Italy, archbishop and metropolitan of the province of Rome, sovereign of Vatican City State and servant of the servants of God, his holiness Benedict xvi.” ...
In July 2007, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith restated the doctrines of Dominus Iesus, a document the pope—then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger—had signed in 2000 to proclaim that non-Catholics were “gravely deficient” and that Protestant churches are “not churches in the proper sense.” ....
Mid-May that year, the pope traveled to Brazil to open an assembly of the Latin American bishops’ conference—not by invitation, but by personal choice. There he challenged the bishops to galvanize a continent-wide crusade against competing non-Catholic religions...
The pope has also resurrected [I would have said "reinvigorated" since, never having been murdered, despite assassination attempts, it was not in need of being resurrected] the Tridentine Mass.... The more inclusive, modern mass the church adopted in its place was scorned by hard-core Catholics, one of whom was a younger Joseph Ratzinger. [I don't think this is a fair characterization of Ratzinger's critiques of the Pauline Missal, at any point in his or its history] In July of 2006, Pope Benedict reversed that restriction, reconnecting the church to its medieval past. [The sentence would have read better and been more accurate without the word "medieval"]
The offense to Jews grew worse when, in February of 2008, the pope revised the “Good Friday Prayer for the Jews” portion of the Tridentine Mass. The new version reads: “Let us also pray for the Jews: That our God and Lord may illuminate their hearts, that they acknowledge that Jesus Christ is the Savior of all men.” ...
Conservative Roman Catholics see nothing to balk at in praying that Jews would emerge from darkness. They see no problem with labeling non-Catholics gravely deficient. Catholicism, after all, is universalism. The church can never attain its universal potential—more are coming to believe—unless it stops pretending that those outside of it have access to God. [This is simply wrong, but I imagine it reflects the author's own denomination's theology]
While some take offense at the pope’s political incorrectness, an increasing number find it refreshing in a world sick with moral relativism. They appreciate his courage in turning his back to lead the congregation [love this image he has used several times] ...
This was the message of Pope Benedict’s sermon this past Sunday. He spoke of how Jesus’s saying offended many, who responded, “This is a hard saying! Who can listen to it?” The pope then said, “And from that moment on, many of His disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied Him. Jesus, however, does not lessen His claim. Indeed, He directly addresses the 12 saying, ‘Will you also go away?’”
This is the pope’s challenge to the faithful. “Jesus in fact is not satisfied with a superficial and formal following,” he said. Total devotion—even in opposition to non-believers—is required.
It appears they are accepting the challenge—and that, remarkably, their numbers are swelling. It’s been said that crowds came to see Pope John Paul ii, but they come to hear Benedict xvi. Over his pontificate, Benedict has consistently attracted larger audiences to witness his weekly homilies in St. Peter’s Square than did his predecessor.[There has been some questioning of the way the numbers at papal audiences are interpreted to prove one point or another. I have no opinion, so I don't wish to endorse his.]
As their devotion grows, so does the indignation of the pope’s growing list of opponents. And so too does the inevitability of a violent clash—prophesied in the Bible—between the church and its fiercest enemies, which are becoming more polarized before our eyes.
And that his looking forward to Armageddon shares a bit too much of the emotion with which a child awaits Christmas.
"For the time being...."
Is that what is called misdirect?
The Vatican is denying rumors promulgated by some news organizations that announced forthcoming changes in the liturgy.Now anything, or nothing could happen, without him having uttered an untruth.Father Ciro Benedettini, deputy director of the Vatican press office, clarified that "for the time being there are no institutional proposals for a modification of the liturgical books used at present," Vatican Radio reported.
In recent days some media sources incorrectly reported that the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments had presented proposals to Benedict XVI for a "reform of the liturgical reform" motivated by the Second Vatican Council.
Monday, 24 August 2009
One Poor Afflicted Man
I was glad, after three weeks of it, to have played/sung/listened to the refrain to Haugen's Gustate et Videte for what is probably the last time.
I wrote out chanted verses for the cantors of course.
Since Ord 19 & 20 , cycle B, use very different verses than Ord 21 cycle B, there were two different editions, of course.
But it was only this year that I noticed that besides using one fewer verse than the preceding week, the lectionary psalm for the 20th Sunday of the year speaks of "the poor one," rather than "the afflicted man."
??!?#???&?
I wrote out chanted verses for the cantors of course.
Since Ord 19 & 20 , cycle B, use very different verses than Ord 21 cycle B, there were two different editions, of course.
But it was only this year that I noticed that besides using one fewer verse than the preceding week, the lectionary psalm for the 20th Sunday of the year speaks of "the poor one," rather than "the afflicted man."
??!?#???&?
Squelching Liturgical Rumors...
Catholic News Agency reports that there is no truth to the rumors that the Vatican was about to move to amend the liturgical books as part of the "Reform of the Reform."
The Press Office of the Holy See today denied reports in the Italian press that Pope Benedict is poised to make changes to enhance the sacredness of the liturgy. The statement added that there are currently no institutional proposals to alter the rites being used to celebrate the Mass.The Assistant Director of the Press Office, Father Ciro Benedettini, said that "so far there are no institutional proposals for amendment of the books currently in use."
Fr. Benedettini made the statement after the Vatican watcher Andrea Tornielli wrote that the bishops who comprise the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments had voted on March 12 to recommend a series of liturgical reforms to the Pope.
Tornielli wrote that the bishops of the Congregation voted almost unanimously to “restore greater sacredness to the rite, to recover the meaning of Eucharistic adoration, to restore Latin in the celebration and to revamp the introductory parts of the Missal to put an end to abuses, experimentation and inappropriate creativity.”
The bishops also reportedly voted to reaffirm that the norm for receiving Holy Communion is on the tongue and not the hand. However, noted Tornielli, some bishops’ conferences have received an indult from Rome to allow the reception of the Eucharist on the hand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
