Todd at Catholic Sensibility points me to an editorial from the National Catholic Reporter (not to be confused with the National Catholic Register). It seems that the Bishops voted overwhelmingly to adopt the Mass language recommendations that have been accepted by Catholics in every other English speaking nation on earth.
Those among the bishops, particularly Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, Pa., a rare liturgist among the bishops [ed.- "rare" meaning one of the few bishops who subscribes to the progressive agenda at NCR], who argued most persistently -- in a losing cause -- for retaining what might be called a “user-friendly” approach to translation, conceded graciously in the end.
"User-friendly". You mean like the plopping of a "table" in the sanctuary, the ripping down of the altar rails, the denuding of the walls of sacred art, the conversion of transcendental hymns to "bad lounge acts" and the releagating of our Lord and Savior to a side closet, out of sight, out of mind. Yup, that was "user-friendly" to the hundreds of thousands of Catholic in the United States in the 60's when the hurricane called "the spirit of Vatican II" ripped through our churches turning them from havens of the sacred, to showcases of the profane.
Excuse me if I'm not sympathetic.
The language of battle is unfortunate because liturgy is supposed to serve as a point of union, not division. It is appropriate because the tactics used to reverse the reforms that had resulted from the Second Vatican Council of the 1960s and more than three decades of subsequent work were secretive and engineered by people incompetent in the discipline and accountable only to a small group who had achieved power. That power was used to accomplish what they could not by persuasion or through the mainstream of liturgical scholarship.
If you are Catholic, you have to believe that "people incompetent in the discipline and accountable only to a small group who had achieved power" are guilded by the Holy Spirit. Maybe God is incompetent, and maybe you know more than him. This "scholarship" is the same misbegotten ego-trip that prompts women to get on a boat, dress up and play "bishop".
So you either believe our Holy Father and the Living Magesterium of the Catholic Church are guilded by the Holy Spirit and protected by the promise of Jesus Christ when He said: "I give you the keys to the kingdom..." and "The gates of hell will not prevail..." or you don't.
Do you?
In 1997, as John L. Allen Jr. reported nearly eight years ago, 11 men met in secret in the Vatican “to overhaul the American lectionary, the collection of scripture readings authorized for use in the Mass. Short-circuiting a six-year debate over ‘inclusive language’ by retaining many of the most controversial uses of masculine vocabulary, and revamping texts approved by the U.S. bishops, this group decided how the Bible will sound in the American church.”
Translation: the mangling of the lectionary got so bad that it was not recognizably a Catholic Mass. You didn't even need the clown suits to tell you that something was amiss.
All in all, I'm not a huge opponent of inclusive language when it pertains to us. Substuting "brothers and sisters" for "brothers" in Paul's Epistles doesn't bug me too much. But praying something like "Our Mother, who art in heaven..." makes my blood boil. Taking out every instance of "He" in the music and substituting "God" (or worse, substituting "She" for every other verse, and I have personally seen that happen) makes me want to go postal.
Jesus is male. He has a penis. We know this because he had it circumcised! When asked how to pray, he said to say: "Our Father who art in heaven. Not our God who art in heaven, not our Parent who art in heaven, not our Mother who art in heaven. God the FATHER who is theologically male in relation to his church.
Of the group that met in secret, only one man (no women were included) [ ed. - So? Is there some affirmative action program in the Catholic Church that I haven't heard about?] held a graduate degree in scripture studies; two members were not native English speakers; another was from the United Kingdom and had spent no significant time in the United States; and the group included several members who came in with reputations for opposing inclusive language. “Powers in Rome handpicked a small group of men who in two weeks undid work that had taken dozens of years,” the NCR report continued.
The Holy Spirit can work swiftly when needed, praise God.
Life goes on and so will the community, even if we have to wrap our tongues around awkward constructions that treat Latin as if it were the language Jesus himself spoke and even if we have to wait longer for our own official language to acknowledge that more than half the human race is female.
Well, Jesus may or may not have spoken Latin. One thing I *do* know, he probably didn't speak English.
I have one question... Who, exactly, does "inclusive language" benefit? Does it allow us to praise God more fully? Or is to appeal to our own egos, to change the word of God to match our particularly fragile sensibilities?
But the recitation of the history is significant in demonstrating that at the highest levels of the community there were those who had little regard for precedent, competence, the work of others and established process. It is an attitude that has seeped down into lower levels of church governance, where too often power is the only credential necessary for mandating jarring and extreme changes to the life and practice of the community.
This is what you people are all about isn't it. Power. Women are "maginalized", they don't have "power". The kumbaya liturgists don't have "power". The minority kumbaya bishops don't have "power".
Let me clue you. It isn't about "power", it's about service. Jesus washed the feet of his disciples as a example to all of us as to what it means to be a disciple ourselves. Jesus walked the Via Dolorosa with a huge wooden cross on his shoulders. He arrived, at Golgotha, and without a whimper, carp or bitch, allowed himself to be nailed to that cross to hang there until he died.
Our lot is service, obedience and humility.
I have sat through mangled liturgies in bare churches singing banal "how great we art" type tunes. I have realized that my Lord and Savior is real and present in the accidents of bread and wine in the tabernacle, even if I have to go down a hall into a side closet to visit Him. I have received him into myself as I am within Him in full communion with Him and his Church. I have trusted in the wisdom of the Spirit that this was the right path. I am now going to continue to trust that the wisdom of the Spirit (of God, not "Vatican II") is leading us to a fuller, richer, more trancendental worship experience.
What will be most important is the manner and degree of educating -- catechesis -- that is done regarding the new translations and why things are changing.
Indeed. As it was not done after Vatican II. I know because the lack of catechesis is what caused me to lose my faith as a child. It was proper catechesis which brought me back in my 40's.
We hope that the educating is user-friendly, pragmatic as well as theoretical and theological. Most of all, we hope professional liturgists and practitioners are brought in as full partners in the preparation of teaching materials and in the implementation of the new translations.
I hope the catechists are faith-filled, Eucharist-centered, correctly-educated women and men, who can shepherd Catholics back to a life of devotion, prayer and service.
Finally, we suspect that the way forward will also include accommodating those who simply refuse to go along and will stand in place and continue to use the same language they’ve been using for decades. Our suspicion is that God will not be terribly upset by a little show of resistance.
The moment calls for the graciousness that Trautman and others have demonstrated. We hope that discussion of liturgical reform in the future will show similar consideration for the good of the larger community.
And I pray that more consideration is shown than was shown to traditionalists in the post-sprit-of-vatican-II era. I also pray that those who persist in the obstinantly holding on to the "kumbaya lingo" will have their hearts of stone replaced with fleshy hearts.
I KNOW someone who reads this has to have a brother, cousin, friend, co-worker, sixth cousin twiced removed on their wife's side... Not every man in my age group is married. I know this, I have to beleive(sic)this.
Here you go, Kat:
Glorious Saint Anthony, my friend and special protector, I come to you with full confidence in my present necessity. In your overflowing generosity you hear all those who turn to you. Your influence before the throne of God is so effective that the Lord readily grants great favors at your request. Please listen to my humble petition in spite of my unworthiness and sinfulness. Consider only your great and constant love for Jesus and Mary, and my desire for their glory and mercy. I beg you to obtain for me the grace I so greatly need, if it be God's will and for the good of my soul. I place this earnest petition in the care of the little mission children so that they may present it to you along their innocent prayers. Bless me, powerful Saint Anthony, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.
I was reading Anchoress' missive on her eventual waking, and it got me to thinking about a discussion I had with my wife regarding when I'm called home to Jesus.
I don't like the idea of creamation, because I have this irrational fear of "how is God going to ressurrect my body if it's all burned up?". (I know, God can make me a spanking new body with just a thought, but the idea of being burnt up does not appeal to me.)
So if I'm going to be buried, I'm going to need a casket.
I don't like the idea of my wife being hoodwinked into buying some $3000 monstrosity that is simply going to be buried in the ground, so I decided on a Trappist Monk Casket (pictured at the right). That's right. The monks make the caskets and my favorite is the simple pine box with the cross on it.
I read that you can even have it delivered with shelves in it so you can use it as a book shelf until you need it to be buried in.
For other neato Trappist products, check out the fruitcakes. I ask for one of these for Christmas every year. They start around advent baking the cake, then they soak it in rum over and over until it's soaked and aged just right. Eat responsibly. Don't eat and drive!
The gender gap is not a distinctly American one but it is a Christian one, according to Murrow. The theology and practices of Judaism, Buddhism and Islam offer "uniquely masculine" experiences for men, he said.
"Every Muslim man knows that he is locked in a great battle between good and evil, and although that was a prevalent teaching in Christianity until about 100 years ago, today it's primarily about having a relationship with a man who loves you unconditionally," Murrow said.
"And if that's the punch line of the Gospel, then you're going to have a lot more women than men taking you up on your offer because women are interested in a personal relationship with a man who loves you unconditionally. Men, generally, are not."
I remember the Catholic Church pre-Vatican II. God was a judge. His mercy was infinite, but He had certain rules you were expected to follow. If you didn't follow the rules, you had to take the consequences. God would weep at what He had to do to you, but as any good father knows, you have to take responsibility for your actions, and sometimes you need to punish your children for their own good no matter how much it hurts you.
Now Jesus loves you unconditionally. There is little or no talk about sin and repentence. There is no call to holiness. There is a "mommy" God who enfolds you in His (her?) arms, loves you as you are, kisses your boo-boos and tells you that everything will be alright.
We don't have to call God "our Mother", because that is what He has become in everyone's mind.
Crucifixes have been replaced by "risen Lords". Seeing our savior suffering on the cross makes us think that maybe we might have some obligation to carry our own.
Sin is not mentioned. "Reconciliation rooms" where we get to have face to face "chats" with the priest are almost never used. People, men in particular are not being challenged to turn away from sin and follow a life of holiness.
If God loves me unconditionally, whatever sins I've committed or whatever inclination to sin I might have, why do I need to go to church?
I always enjoy reading Todd at Catholic Sensibility's analyses of most Catholic issues. I dare say, I don't agree with him most of the time, and in the Pillow Fight tradition, this is one of those cases.
Somebody tell me when this document gets translated from the Italian, please.
"Never before has the natural institution of matrimony and family been victim of such violent attacks," said the document, signed by Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, council president.
The institution's worst enemy has always been the couples who are unwilling to delve into the true nature of a sacramental marriage, especially with the notions of sacrifice and the presence of Christ.
Absolutely! But this doesn't mean it's improper to address "Marriage Enemy #2". This is the same logic used by abortion proponents who claim that as long as there is one child in need of adoption, abortion will still be required.
We can set the "broken leg" and keep trying to address the masesticized cancer.
The cardinal said "radical currents" are not simply promoting acceptance of new models of the family, but actually are proposing them as positive alternatives to the family based on the marriage of a man and a woman open to having children.
Violence? Really? Western culture is all about disengagement, individualism, and paying for privilege. Violence happens with guns, knives, and bombs. Homosexuals are inconvenient to the predominant culture, especially when they aspire to nurture and sustain and do other things as part of natural human virtue.
And I don't see how the cardinal is able to sustain his whoop on man+woman+children. The fact is that many couples, particularly those who marry much later in life, cannot have children. The family is not dependent on a couple's ability to produce biological offspring outside of a laboratory.
The Cardinal is able to maintain his "whoop on man+woman+children" simply because he's right on target.
The fact is, an unintentional sterile man or woman was designed to produce children. Their remaining reproductive tract is being used to the purpose to which God intended it, that is for the placing of a penis within it to assist God in the creation of a new human.
A gay couple are missing one of the requesite parts to complete a fruitful, ordered sexual act (whether the act results in pregnancy or not).
As such, a gay couple parodys fruitful, life giving, sacramental sex. If that is indeed the case, "gay marriage" parodys the sacramental, covenantal, joining of a husband and wife. A parody seeks to poke fun at that which it parodys and to cheapen that which is parodys (ask Jeff Miller at The Curt Jester; he is the king of the Catholic parody).
Many families define themselves as "extended" or "adoptive." In history, parents have not always survived far into their children's lives. Does a family who has lost a parent cease to be a family because it is no longer procreative? Does a couple past childbearing age cease to be a family, or do we just wink and nod because we couldn't very well tell them to join monasteries in their retirement.
No, a family doesn't cease to be a family because it is no longer procreative. A family who is unable (as opposed to unwilling... artificial contracepting or sterilizing) to procreate doesn't cease to be a family regardless on whether it started out that way. Openness to children is the subjugating your will to God's and using His gift of fruitful sexuality as He intended.
Gay couples are unable to do that simply because of biology.
A marriage is not a marriage if it is not open to children. This means the couple cannot be intentionally sterile, and they must be able to complete the conjugal act (for those "biology challenged" that means a penis in a vagina with an ejaculation in said vagina).
I'll save my biggest criticism if I find the document glosses over the needs of the millions of children who are waiting for adoption. I'm willing to be pleasantly surprised, but from what I read on CNS, it looks like "Old Man Theology" biting the Church on the butt once again.
Maybe more Catholics who are having trouble conceiving will consider adoption before IVF. But that doesn't seem to be the case. Few United States Catholics are willing in these "personal freedom" times to subugate their will to that of God. Maybe this teaching will get through to them, but probably not. Like with most other Catholic teachings that those in the cafeteria don't like, they'll either simply ignore the teaching they don't like or stomp off in a huff.
There are times when it's better for these prelates to keep quiet than to damage the Body with documents like this.
I don't think this is one of these times. I would hazard a guess that most of these children requiring adoption are not a result of the faithful following of Church teaching. The sexual libertinism which brought us contraception, abortion and "gay marriage" is in a large part responsible for the glut of children needing adoption in the first place.
So to put out a fire, you douse it with gasoline, right?
In an act that some witnesses called a "sacrilege" and others called a sign of "solidarity," a man who was not wearing a sash received a Communion wafer from a priest, broke it into pieces and handed it to some of the sash wearers, who consumed it on the spot.
I really don't know why this Bishop doesn't learn from his mistakes. It would be a simple thing to revoke the indult to receive in the hand, and forbid the use of EME's (Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist) for one day. That means only the priest distributes communion and only on the tongue.
This would help put a damper on the desecration of our Lord and Savior in this particularly heinous way.
This isn't even required, if the EMEs are trained properly (and none of them are in cahoots with the protesters). If someone tries to walk away with the Body of Christ, you could have big, burly ushers positioned at the heads of all the pews watching and stop people who don't consume the host then and there (I would volunteer for this particular duty in a minute) and ask them to either consume it, or give it back. You deal with them just like you would if a Satanist tried to walk out with a consecrated host.
This sort of thing would never happen in our church.
Have you ever heard or seen or read about something that just made you want to jump up and yell "YEAH!!! Go get 'im, brother!!!". Well Ted Harvey (who is assistant Minority Leader in the Colorado Legislature) did just that.
I am going to break with tradition, and assign a Brass Balls Award which was normally reserved to ordained Catholic clerics to this gentleman. What he did definitely deserves the award which he should proudly display on his mantle.
Mr. Harvey, who is pro-life was wondering what to do about the resolution before the house honoring Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood for 90 years of murder service.
He got a great idea when he invited Gianna Jessen who suffers from cerebral palsy, to sing the National Anthem at that day's opening ceremonies.
Following a committee hearing, I rushed into the House Chambers just as the opening morning prayer was about to be given. Between the prayer and the pledge of allegiance I wrote a quick note to the Speaker of the House explaining that Gianna is an advocate for cerebral palsy. I took the note to the Speaker and asked if I could have my friend open the last day of session by singing the national anthem. Without any hesitation the Speaker took the microphone and said, “Before we begin, Representative Harvey has made available for us Gianna Jessen to sing the National Anthem.”
Gianna sang the most amazing rendition of the Star Spangled Banner that you could possibly imagine. Every person in the entire chamber was completely still, quiet, and in awe of this frail young lady’s voice. Due to her cerebral palsy, Gianna often loses her balance, and shortly after starting to sing she grabbed my arm to stabilize herself, and I could tell that she was shaking. Suddenly, midway through the song, she forgot the words and began to hum and said, "Please forgive me I am so nervous." She then immediately began singing again and every House member and every guest throughout the chambers began to sing along with her to give her encouragement and lift her up.
As I looked around the huge hall I listened to the unbelievable melody of Gianna’s voice being accompanied by a choir of over 100 voices. I had chills running all over my body and I knew that I had just witnessed an act of God.
Fabulous! But the best is yet to come...
Mr. Speaker, members, if you would allow me just a few more moments I would appreciate your time.
My name is Ted Harvey not Paul Harvey but please let me tell you the rest of the story.
The cause of Gianna’s cerebral palsy is not because of some biological freak of nature, but rather the choice of her mother. You see when her biological mother was 17 years old and 7 Â∏ months pregnant she went to a Planned Parenthood clinic to seek a late term abortion. The abortionist performed a saline abortion on this 17-year-old girl. This procedure requires the injection of a high concentration of saline into the mother’s womb which the fetus is then bathed in and swallows which results in the fetus being burned to death, inside and out. Within 24 hrs the results are normally an induced stillborn abortion.
As Gianna can testify the procedure is not always 100% effective. Gianna is an aborted late term fetus that was born alive. The high concentration of saline in the womb for 24 hrs resulted in a lack of oxygen to her brain and is the cause of her cerebral palsy. Members, today we are going to recognize the 90th anniversary of Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood…
BANG! The gavel came down.
Read the whole thing. It's a wonderful story and will have you cheering. That took such guts and fortitude, I don't know if I could have done it.
This gentleman rang the bell, and it can't be "unrung". Fabulous job, assemblyman. You are the kind of leader this nation needs.
I haven't commented on the St. Mary's by the Sea kneeling fisaco, because it pains me to see faithful Catholics being abused. Oh, the people have had their moments, distributing leaflets, undermining the new pastor, and generally making nuisances of themselves.
Oh my! I'd better get to confession! I guess my soul is in mortal danger. (Well, as it happens, that's not the case, but read the thing anyway. It exemplifies what happenes when clueless priests, presided over by heterodox bishops, talk with reporters.)
What interested me was the commentary done by the man with black hat. This is an entry worthy of a true pillow fighter. David writes in "Flectamus":
The current universal norm after the Agnus Dei is for the faithful to kneel, "unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise." Well, in Orange County, he has. So why not comply?
There is a saying that goes, when someone lies to you, the lie itself matters less, than that you no longer know whether to believe them. In this instance, if you jerk people around enough about how Vatican II says this and the Church says that, when it clearly is not so, you can just kiss your credibility goodbye -- not to mention any practical authority that goes along with it. Then one day, when you issue a directive, and give all sorts of rationale that clearly offends the pious sensibilities of those whom you serve... well, at some point people might just decide for themselves that they've been jerked around long enough.
Yup, you keep feeding people dog doo, and calling it chocolate ice cream, they might eat it for a while, but then they will finally refuse to eat any more.
You really need to trust your shepherd. If you don't trust your shepherd, you might stop following. If you see your shepherd, instead of leading you to green pastures, leading you off of a cliff, you might stop and say: "No way, Ennis".
I really don't know what I would do if I were in the diocese of Orange. I might have become Episcopalian, because they seem to be more conservative than the Roman Catholics there. Or maybe I'd just follow along with the bishop until I got another one, or maybe I'd go SSPX. I don't know.
I do know that this bishop is badly mismanaging his diocese, in my opinion. He is teaching contrary to Catholic teaching on a number of issues, including homosexuality.
All I can do it tell my brothers and sisters in Orange to keep the faith. I will pray for them.
