Tag Archives: tradition

Conversations on the Catechism: “I Believe” – “We Believe”

"There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church, which is, of course, quite a different thing." – Bishop Fulton J. Sheen

A recent post by Jollyblogger got me thinking. He’s trying to start a League of Reformed Bloggers with an eventual Carnival of the Reformed. I’ve seen a few "merely" Christian and Protestant carnivals. I haven’t seen any Catholic carnivals. Does anyone know of one? Maybe someone within St. Blog’s could organize one (I wouldn’t have a clue where to start.).

Anyhow, I’d like get people to discuss the broader issues of Catholicism (as opposed to gluten-free wafers). In particular, I’d like to invite my Protestant readers to read the Catechism of the Catholic Church. To those ends, I’m going to write posts that highlight sections of the Catechism. This will be the first.

I invite all of my Christian readers to read Part One, Section One: "I Believe" – "We Believe" (paragraphs 26 through 184). What statements do you agree with? What parts would you disagree with? Why?

Engaged Encounter Part I: House of God?

From the 10th through the 12th, my fiance and I participated in the Diocese of Pittsburgh‘s Catholic Engaged Encounter. We weren’t able to take the night classes downtown, so the retreat was our only option for satisfying the diocese requirements. I’d heard a range of appraisals of the experience, from "Eh – nothing special" to "hotbed for heterodoxy" to "a lot of fun".

Ultimately, I found the weekend to be a mixed bag. We learned some useful relationship lessons, but nothing substantial about what it means to enter the Sacrament of holy Matrimony. I also had issues with the site and masses held there. On the other hand, we made some friends. I didn’t want to lump everything together, so I’ve decided to post two entries. This one covers the site and the Masses. The second will cover the educational content.

The Kearns Spirituality Center is located on the campus of La Roche College in Allison Park, PA (about a half hour north of Pittsburgh). La Roche is founded and sponsored by the sisters of the Congregation of Divine Providence. In theory, it’s a Catholic school, but I couldn’t find anything besides the word "Catholic" in their mission statement to demonstrate it. The CDP mission statement also seems rather generic. Not only does it not seem particularly Catholic, it’s barely Christian. Jesus’ name could be replaced with Buddha without having much impact. The mission statement for the "spirituality center" leaves even more to be desired. I didn’t know all this before I went, by the way. I only had the vague feeling that the name "Spirituality Center" portended quasi-New Age, universalist, and "progressive" nuttiness.

It’s 8PM Friday and we’ve arrived a little late at the center. It’s a fairly attractive building – modern, but tasteful. We take our bags to our rooms and join everyone else in the conference room (The tables were removed and all the chairs were arranged to face the white board on one of the long walls). I’ll save the content of the first talk for Part 2.

After the talk, the priest asked if anyone wanted to help out with Saturday’s mass. I asked him if he needed/wanted someone to serve altar. He seemed nonplussed but accepted my offer. I asked if he or the center had cassocks and surplices. He laughed and said I needn’t worry about that. I said in reply that it wasn’t a worry; I wanted to wear them. He chuckled somewhat nervously and said I could "take the day off" and serve as-is. That exchange didn’t give me a comfortable feeling. I felt like a child who’d been assured that his tooth was placed adequately under the pillow and that the Tooth Fairy would indeed come. Perhaps that’s an odd analogy, but it captures the feeling that a genuine concern of mine was met with benevolent condescension.

I brushed off the bizarre exchange and went with my fiance to visit the chapel. The Visitation Chapel is shaped a bit like a magic wand. The hallway is the shaft. Before the hallway ends and the gathering space begins, there is a burbling font. I’m really not sure if Holy Water flowed through it or not, but I gave it benefit of the doubt. I’m really not fond of those things. They just don’t seem reverent or tasteful.

Anyhow, after blessing ourselves, we proceeded into the chapel proper, which, as a six-pointed star, serves as the head of the wand. As with the exterior, the architecture is tasteful and attractive, if a bit plain. It’s a comfortable room with large, clear windows dominating about half the walls. There’s an inoffensive wood cutout on the right that depicts the Visitation. On the left is a baby grand piano. The ceiling is high and comes to a flattened peak with small skylights.

There are no pews. Instead, there are individual chairs arranged around the room, facing inward to face the altar. There are no kneelers. That really annoyed me.

Looking past the chairs, we see the altar. No altar clothe adorns it’s wooden surface. It’s round. Put some bar stools around it and you’d have a fine table. Why make it round? It’s not like they want to incense the whole thing, assuming they even had the implements. It’s a monument to pointlessness. I thought "progressives" moved the altar away from the wall so the priest could face the people. How can he do that with people seated on every side of him?

[Stained-Glass-Crucifix.jpg] At this point, I’m quite irritated and my blood pressure is shooting up. It’s too bad the situation didn’t improve. Behind the altar, hanging from wires is one of the ugliest crucifixes I’ve ever seen. It’s a stained glass work of abstract "art". I call it "Jesus of the Crab Hands". Below it, on a small table that resembles a nightstand, resides what must be the tabernacle. I only know that because there is a lit candle next to it. Nothing about the box itself reveals its purpose – no obvious directionality or door. It’s about the size and shape of a very large shoebox. It’s black and the sides have vertical strips of hammered metal. It looks more like a rectangular hatbox than a tabernacle. At least it’s not hidden away in a corner. Then again, it might as well be if nobody recognizes it for what it is.

Everything about this place screams of inclusiveness overriding tradition and orthodoxy. The tyranny of PC church building apparently eschews the inclusion of traditional forms of reverence. A Quaker might feel at home there, but I didn’t. It’s not that most of its aspects are overtly illicit, but rather that the room doesn’t feel like a sanctuary. It’s more like a lobby, waiting room, or perhaps a small food court. I can imagine plants and sculptures adorning it. It’d be a delightful place in which to read and sip a coffee, but not worship.

[chapel.jpg]

[labaryinth.gif] That night and over the course of the weekend, I looked around the building and grounds for signs of authentic Catholicism. I didn’t find many. The bookshelves held more zen how-tos than Catholic, or even Protestant spiritual works. The only author whose name jumped out at me was Thomas Merton, who I’ve been told wandered a bit off the orthodox path in his later years. There were few genuine crucifixes to be seen. Most were resurrexifixes or plain crosses. At least one of the crucifixes was mounted next to door and was obscured by opening it. Two bright spots were the meditation walk and outdoor labyrinth. What the facility tour site doesn’t show or tell is that the meditation connects with a path lined with statues depicting the stations of the cross. I guess mentioning it would be un-inclusive.

Mass on Saturday wasn’t really noteworthy. I was the only extraordinary minister of the Eucharist. We didn’t sing. The homily was forgettable and harmless. The only thing that bothered me was that nobody knelt for the consecration. I realize it’s only optional in the absence of kneelers, but that doesn’t stop people at Heinz Chapel. Rather than draw attention to myself, I decided to "do as the Romans" and remain standing. All the while, I was thinking to myself, "Kneeling, aside from showing proper reverence for the Real Presence, is the norm in this diocese".

"In the dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason. Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects after the consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise." – General Instruction of the Roman Missal, No. 43

Sunday was a different matter. I chose not to serve so I could sit next to my fiance. Before mass started, copies of the Gather songbook were handed out. As a convert who goes to mass with the Oratorian Fathers 95%, I was unaware of what lay in store for me. The priest asked if anyone could play piano. Silence answered him, so he informed us that we’d be singing a capella. Our opening hymn? "Canticle of the Sun" by Marty Haugen. I refused to sing. That’s not dignified mass music. It’d be fine for a praise and worship sing, but not the Sacred Liturgy. I’m a proud member of SMMMHDH, the Society for a Moratorium on the Music of Marty Haugen and David Haas. I’d like to ban Ernie Sands, too, but I’ll get to that in a moment.

At the offertory, there wasn’t a collection. We’d paid a lot of money for the weekend already. Also, donations were solicited earlier in the day. When a couple went to a table in the back to get the gifts, the priest instructed them to bring the donation box. He proceeded to place it on the altar! If you don’t know why that’s wrong, read Redemptionis Sacramentum [70]. One good act of disobedience and sacrilege deserves another. For the consecration, we were asked to make a circle around altar. This, too, is a reprobated practice. My fiance and I joined the circle but remained on the side opposite the priest.

The homily was again forgettable and harmless. On a side note, I don’t like when priests leave the pulpit to pace back and forth. It’s distracting and reminds me of televangelists. To close this reverent experience, an irritating 5/4 time piece by Ernie Sands called "Sing of the Lord’s Goodness" was sung. Again, I refrained. Who the heck told him 5/4 is a good signature for church music?!? The timing and the melody strongly reminded me of several songs in "Jesus Christ Superstar". Don’t get me wrong – I love that musical (it’s one of the few I can tolerate). It’s just woefully inappropriate for the liturgy. I’d call the songs hippy music, but most of the hippies I’ve met have far better taste. Give me "In the Garden of Eden" ("Inna Gadda Da Vida"), ala "The Simpsons", any day. 😉

So that’s it. Most of my gripes are of an aesthetic nature, but some aren’t. If I were the bishop, I’d disband the CDP, renovate Kearns, and censure the CEE priest. Why doesn’t Bishop Wuerl have a spine? I know he’s an orthodox guy, but I’ve yet to hear of him keeping rogue progressives in check. I’ll be posting soon about a scandal involving St. Agnes Church, which belongs to Carlow University, another CINO school.

[A small quote from the GIRM, regarding kneeling, was added September 28. – Funky]

Read part 2 here.

Signs and Ceremonies: The Virgin Mary

The following is from Teaching Truths by Signs and Ceremonies or The Church, Its Rites and Services Explained for the People by Rev. Jas. L. Meagher (1882, New York: Russel Brothers).

"St. Ephanius, born in the year 310, says: ‘What shall I say, or what shall I preach of that beautiful and Holy Virgin? God alone excepted, she excels all others. In her nature more beautiful than the Cherubims and Seraphims and all the angelic host, no earthly tongue can sing her heavenly praises, not even the tongues of angels. O, Holy Virgin, pure dove and celestial spouse. Mary thou art heaven, the temple and the throne of divinity; thou hast Christ transcendent in heaven, as thy son on earth thou a bright cloud in heaven, brought Christ to illuminate the world. Thou gate of heaven, whom the prophet plainly and openly speaks in course of his prayer. ‘My sister, my spouse, is a garden enclosed, a fountain sealed up.’ That Virgin is an immaculate lilly, who brought forth the more perfect rose, Christ. O holy Mother of God. O, Immaculate Dove! In thee the Word became incarnate. O, most holy Virgin, whose sanctity stupefies the angels! Wonderful is the miracle in heaven! a woman clothed with the sun, the moon under her feet; wonderful is the miracle in heaven! the bosom of a virgin holds the Son of God. Wonderful is the miracle in heaven! the God of the angels becomes the Child of the Virgin. The angels condemn Eve; now they cover Mary with glory, for she raised up fallen Eve and she sends Adam, fallen from Paradise, into heaven. The grace of the holy Virgin is immense. Hence Gabriel first salutes the Virgin saying ‘Hail full of grace, Hail most holy Mother Immaculate who brought forth Christ, who was before thee.’" (Ch. 7, p. 112-113)

"Mary was mother of the entire Being born of her; but the Being born of her was the Son of God, and therefore she is the mother of God, and being the mother of God, she is higher, nobler, grander in dignity than any other creature that was mdae, but not by nature, for the angels and all the celestial spirits made by God in heaven are superior to us in the rank of creation and in knowledge; but no angel, no spirit in heaven is the mother of God – only Mary was created for that dignity. She is, therefore, not by nature, but by dignity, far above all the creatures that God made, and that dignity is founded upon her Maternity, because she is mother of God; but she is nothing, compared with God, and no one can adore her, none can worship her, for she is a creature, and to adore a creature is idolatry, and idolatry is the giving to a creature the worship that belongs to God alone. Therefore, idolatry is the greatest sin. Therefore, to adore Mary would be a great sin against God. Adoration, then, belongs only to the Divinity. Therefore we can adore only the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost." (Ch. 7, p. 115)

"All her gifts, all her dignity, all her excellences come from her Son; and if she is full of grace, in the words of the Archangel, that grace comes from Christ, for he is the source from whence come forth all graces and blessings that enlightened angels and men. He is the mediator between God and man. No one can go to heaven but through him; but as when we want to get some favor from a great person, we do not go directly to him but to some one of influence who is well known to him, and whom he respects, whom he cannot refuse, and we ask that one to intercede for us. Thus, sometimes, when we want something from God, and we consider ourselves so little and imperfect, and we know the tenderness and the sympathy of a woman’s heart, and we know the influence of a mother over her son, and we go to Mary and ask her to use her influence with her Son as she has already done, when she told Him they had no wine at Cana, and He changed the water into wine at her request. As Moses prayed for the sins of Israel in the desert, and God at the prayer of the just and holy Moses did not destroy the people, as the prophets prayed for the kings of Israel and God heard their prayers, ao God hears Mary’s requests and grants her what she asks. She is now dead; but those who are dead do not rest so as not to hear us, as many people suppose, for the very nature of a spirit is to be active and in motion. Thus our souls are never at rest, but ever exercise the power they have of movement and of action. Thus souls separate in heaven are always in action and in motion. Thus souls in heaven see God face to face; and as everything that takes place here on earth is seen by God, and as those spirits see him they see in God what takes place here on earth; they see in God then our prayers, our sufferings, our needs, and thus we know that Mary sees us when we pray, and hears us, and ask God to grant the favors that we ask of her.

We are not obliged to go to her; we can go directly to God, and thus many of us do. Thus it is with Mary and the saints. We pray to them only as the servants of God, or we see in their holiness God’s greatness in them; and if they are great, it is the greatness of god within them, for God made them what they are. We see, therefore, within them God himself, for God lived in them and moved in them, for they were the temples of the Holy Ghost." (Ch. 7, p.115-117)

Can Anybody Hear Me?

I’ve been debating with a Protestant (we’ll call him Joe) on the issue of praying to the Mary and the Saints. He posed an interesting question that I’m not sure how to answer. Here’s the whole exchange.

Me: "…the praying to Mary bit is not worship, so it is not idolatry. It’s like asking a very holy friend to pray for you."

Joe: "I suggest you read 1 Timothy 2:5. (I don’t believe that God wants us praying to anyone besides Him.)

"For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" – 1 Timothy 2:5

Me: "I suggest you read Romans 15:30, Philemon 1:4, 1 Timothy 2:1-4 and this Catholic Enclopedia article.� I’m not looking to refight the Reformation.� I just want you to know that no true Catholic gives latria (worship) to anyone but God.� Take a look at the Catechism if you won’t take my word for it. :)"

"I appeal to you, brethren, by our Lord Jesus Christ and by the love of the Spirit, to strive together with me in your prayers to God on my behalf" – Romans 15:30

"I thank my God always when I remember you in my prayers" – Philemon 1:4

"First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men, for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way. This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." – 1 Timothy 2:1-4

Me: "The point is that nearly all Christians believe that asking fellow members of the Body to pray for you or others is not only acceptable, but laudable.� Catholics and Orthodox believe that death is not a barrier between the Church Militant and the Church Triumphant. We ask the dead (the saints, small ‘s’) to pray for us as we would the living. We generally limit our prayers (really just requests for prayers on our behalf) to those whose lives were so holy we feel assured they are in Heaven (the Saints, big ‘S’). Among these is Christ’s mother. We see Mary as the perfect example of Christian discipleship. We don’t worship her or the Saints. To do that would be heretical and a very grave sin."

Joe: "Here’s a hypothetical situation: The pope, you, and two hundred Catholics in different cities all around the world pray to Mary at the same time. Who does she hear? If you say everyone, you are saying she is omnipresent. That is essentially saying that she is God. Actually, I don’t believe that she hears anyone on this planet who prays to her."

So I ask my St. Blog’s brethren, what’s wrong with the logic behind this question (aside from the fact he probably meant omniscient, rather than omnipresent)?

I suppose, at the very least, he should read this Catholic Encyclopedia article on the Communion of Saints.

Real Men

A New Breed of Priest; My Kind of Priest

In general, … the “John Paul priests” are less supportive than older colleagues of optional celibacy, women priests, the democratic elections of bishops and greater lay leadership, according to numerous surveys. They show less tolerance for dissent against church teachings. And they are more apt to favor greater use of Latin prayers, special vestments, bells and other traditional touches to restore a sense of sacredness to the liturgy ….

Pray that more good young men like these join the priesthood.