Vox Cantoris

Toronto Missa Solemnis-Candlemas

2012-01-24T15:26:00.001-05:00

For more information, please write to unavocetoronto@rogers.com

Bishop Athanasius Schneider--"Communion in the hand must go!"

2012-01-12T21:29:00.002-05:00

My old Grade 10 German is surely not sufficient and thanks to Google Translator; here is the latest from Bishop Athanasius Schneider from Kreuz and the Eponymous Flower. Communion in the hand was an error that must be corrected. You can start correcting it the next time you attend Mass--one person at a time and it begins with you.

Bishop Schneider: Hand Communion Must Go

It is a legend that hand communion goes back to the first century. It comes much more from the devilish schismatic of Geneva, John Calvin. -kreuz.net

(kreuz.net) The current form of hand communion stems from the Calvinists.

This is what Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider (50) of Astana in Kazakhstan said at the end of October for the videosite 'gloria.tv'.

"That was an abuse"

Calvinist self-communion was introduced in the 1960s by decadent Catholic Communities in the Netherlands.

This step happened in disobedience to ecclesiastical rules -- Msgr Schneider stressed: "That was an abuse and the Holy See forbid it in the 1960s."

Finally Paul VI († 1978) addressed hand communion in the Document 'Memoriale Domini' in May 1969 with a "heavy heart":

"In this document the Church said that this form is an exception and that kneeling Communion would remain the rule."

At hand communion the people would take the Host with their fingers and put it in their mouths themselves: "this particular gesture has never taken place in the history of the Church, never."

It was a kind of self communion.

The Lutherans adapted themselves to the Catholics

Msgr Schneider recalled the Episcopal Synod of October 2005 on the Eucharist.

During a recess Msgr Schneider asked an attending Norwegian Lutheran "Bishop" how his community gave the Lord's Supper.

The Lutheran answered that the Norwegian State Church had, up until about ten years ago, been giving supper only kneeling and on the tongue. Yet the influence of decadent Roman Catholics has caused hand communion to be introduced.

Liturgical Minimalism

The Auxiliary Bishop asks that hand communion be prayed and worked against:

"We must deeply desire that this form of current hand communion, which has never been practiced in the Church, be abolished" -- he said with feeling.

Handcommunion is a minimal form of reverence. On the contrary, the Church ought never to be satisfied with minimalism.

Particles of Host on the floor

Msgr Schneider warned that giving hand communion will cause many particles to be lost.

The Hosts are often flaky.

The particles could also adhere to the fingers or remain on the
palm. They would fall on the ground and be trampled.

In Kazakhstan, according to the Auxiliary Bishop, Communion is only given kneeling and on the tongue.

"It so often happens to me and also to other priests, that there are a few particles on the paten."

Without Communion patens, these particles would fall on the floor or in the clothing of the people.

Msgr Schneider also warned that hand communion simplifies the theft of Hosts as well.

Michael Voris and the Archdiocese of Detroit

2012-01-09T18:25:00.001-05:00

The bureaucrats and professional Catholics in the Chancery office have really stepped in it this time and certain bloggers sure need to eat a little crow. LifeSiteNews explains it all and so does Voris. It is a sad state of affairs when this Catholic man is persecuted given the other goings on allowed in that Archdiocese for decades and you can include the homosexualist supporting Bishop Gumbleton in that regard.

A good friend of mine and fellow Catholic blogger in Toronto, Bear-i-tone of The Spirit's Sword has done a good fisk on this and even Mark Shea has linked to it. I don't agree with my friend Bear, but it is worth a read for his intelligent perspective on the matter.

The Epiphany of the LORD

2012-01-08T08:13:00.000-05:00

Whether it was Friday (as it was for me in the EF) or Saturday night (as it was for me where I sang the Vigil Mass) or today if you worship in the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, may you have a blessed Epiphany. For me, it is Holy Family today and let us pray that some day, Epiphany in Canada will be transferred back to January 6 and that we will also have a unified calendar between the OF and EF.

Now that should prompt an interesting discussion, so let us have it.

If there was a new calendar for the OF and EF, what should it look like? Now, let us assume that it is not going to be one or the other but a blending of the best with a hermeneutic of continuity.

So, I shall start with this.

Return the Octave of Epiphany to both (it was done away with in 1962).
Restore the Octave of Pentecost to the OF.
Restore the Gesima Sundays to the OF as a "pre-Lent."

But enjoy this first.

Here is the trio in English

Another great Churchman from Quebec

2012-01-07T13:31:00.003-05:00

Today, January 7 the Church in Canada celebrates the Memorial of St. André Bessette of Montreal with a full Mass Proper. In the United States it was celebrated yesterday, January 6 which was the anniversary of his death as an "Optional Memorial." I am not sure why the Canadian bishops chose to seek Rome's approval for the approval of this Memorial on January 7, but I do agree with it. Often, feasts and memorials are on a significant day in the life of the particular saint and usually on the day of the death, the birthday into eternal life; but this is not always possible so dates close are sometimes chosen. The U.S. bishops chose January 6 but I believe this was wrong. While I can't say for sure that the Canadian Bishops felt that January 6 is truly Epiphany and that some day we might use this proper date again, I'd like to think so.

St. André Bessette of Montreal

Sitting at breakfast at the usual Aris' Place, with a seminarian friend after Mass this morning, the subject of the state of the Church once again arose. He reminded me about long ago investigations into goings on in the Curia by Don Luigi Villa of the Diocese of Brescia. I mentioned to him about something similar conducted by another great Quebec Churchman, the late Édouard Cardinal Gagnon, P.S.S., whom Msgr. Vincent Foy considered to be one of Canada's "most illustrious churchmen...a holy, learned and courageous teacher and defender of Life and the Faith."

Édouard Cardinal Gagnon, P.S.S.

Perusing once again the tribute by Msgr. Foy in Catholic Insight, I could not help but wonder how much the late Cardinal took to his grave and how he suffered for the Church. Cardinal Gagnon believed many Canadian bishops to be in schism due to the Winnipeg Statement. He fought to keep Archbishop Lefebvre and the SSPX from breaking from the Church and he suffered for what he knew and what Pope Paul VI would not heed. While he was not totally ignored by Pope John Paul II and was eventually appointed to head a Pontifical Council, his findings were never revealed and we will never know, at least not on this side of eternity, whether any of his advice on the modernist corruption at the Lateran or the scandals in the Curia were acted upon.

Let us pray that St. André Bessette will seek the grace and mercy of God upon Quebec and Canada.

Let us also pray that through God's grace and St. André's intercession, Canada's newest Cardinal will seek to emulate the clarity, faith and holiness of the late éminence grise as we see upon us a new year which will be of great challenge and continued upheaval in our culture.

Responsorial Psalm Comparison

2012-01-07T09:11:00.000-05:00

In an earlier post, I linked to some wise words by Jeff Ostrowski of the Corpus Christi Watershed. Here is a video comparing some fairly well-worn Responsorial Psalms and a chant version from CCW.

What do you think?

Which do you think would foster greater participation amongst the faithful?

Thomas Christopher Cardinal Collins

2012-01-06T09:47:00.003-05:00

May the LORD on this Epiphany pour out his abundant graces on our new Cardinal Archbishop.

“I am deeply honoured that the Holy Father has called me to be a member of the College of Cardinals. I am grateful for the trust he has placed in me, and recognize this honour as a sign of his esteem for the role of Canada and of the Archdiocese of Toronto in the universal Church. I ask the people of the Archdiocese, whom I am privileged to serve as bishop, and all people in the community, to pray for me and for all who serve Our Lord through ministry in the Church."

Just mellowing out...

2012-01-05T09:47:00.000-05:00

Oh my, I've been very lazy about blogging and most other things as we continue our Christmas celebration at the home of the Vox. Still on vacation until next Monday and basking in the glow of the still fresh Christmas Tree on this dark and cloudy morning, perhaps it is about time to post something at least.

The tree went up on the 23rd and after the branches fell nicely into form it was grandly decorated on Christmas Eve. That night, Vox was at the Toronto parish and with the help of Natale on the organ and a soprano who joined us we put on a lovely little service of Readings and Carols. I opened it with the powerful, This Is the Truth Sent From Above and she closed it with O Holy Night until all the congregation sang Of the Father's Love Begotten just prior to Mass. The weather was good for the 160km. drive to the bucolic countryside for the Traditional Latin Mass at Midnight and again the next day at noon. A lovely lunch on the priest's family farm and then back to Mississauga to my sister's for dinner. After a few days of recovery, Vox's Roast Turkey Christmas Dinner was held with much enjoyment by all including singing for over an hour after dinner as Natale regaled us with his accordion.

Now, what?

Well, there is so much to write about and comment on that I just don't know where to start.

Liturgical work extraordinaire: Here is a great column by Jeff Ostrowski on the New Liturgical Movement about the difference between the Antiphons in the Roman Missal and the Gradual. If you are not familiar with Mr. Ostrowski's wonderful work, then you must visit Corpus Christi Watershed and even consider his Vatican II Hymnal.

Crisis, what crisis? Well, if the His Disgrace Raymond Lahey trash was not enough, we should also consider some prayers, if it is not too late, for Karl Clemens, a suspended priest from the Archdiocese of Kingston who left the priesthood of Christ to slander the Church and live on the gay-track of "Church Street" in Toronto who when 70, "married" his 28 year-old lover, he died a few weeks back in December.. And let's not forget the Auxiliary Bishop of Los Angeles and the people there who will now bear the cost of educating his "children!" Well, at least it was a woman!

Of course the RealProblem besetting the Church is Michael Voris and RealCatholicTV, right?

Epiphany Missa Cantata in Toronto

2012-01-04T07:55:00.001-05:00

Epiphany of the LORD

Friday, January 6, 2012

7:30 P.M.

Missa Cantata in the Extraordianry Form of the Roman Rite

St. Lawrence the Martyr Catholic Church

Scarborough

Et Verbum Caro Factum Est

2011-12-24T13:26:00.001-05:00

A most blessed Christmas to one and all.

The Christmas Letter

2011-12-23T07:30:00.000-05:00

There will be no posts for a few days other than a Christmas page and some changes in the music and colours which I shall do late tomorrow afternoon. Vox will be pretty busy.

On Saturday at 7:30, we have organised a lovely little Service of Readings and Carols to precede Mass in the Ordinary Form at the church in Toronto where I am Cantor for the Vigil Mass. Here is what the program looks like:

The Huron Carol-All
This is the Truth Sent from Above-Vox
Book of Isaiah: "Comfort, yes, comfort My people. ..."
O Come Divine Messiah
St. Luke: "Now in the sixth month..."
The Angel Gabriel
Book of Micha: "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah,..."
Once in Royal David's City
St. Matthew: "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was as follows:..."
O Holy Night-Soprano Solo
St. John: "For God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten Son..."
Of the Father's Love Begotten

Mass will begin with the new ICEL text of the Christmas Proclamation sung in its traditional tone and then O Come All Ye Faithful, the Propers from Simple English Propers and the Missa de Angelis. At Offertory, a two part with organ setting of Tu Scendi Dalle Stella (we have quite a few Italians) and Silent Night at Communion with Hark the Herald Angels Sing as the Recessional.
Then at about 9:15, I shall dash to the sleigh and call on Rudolph to lead me 160km to sing the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite at Midnight in Kinkora and again at Noon on Sunday. Please say an Ave for good roads and strong coffee.

It has been quite the year friends.

Finally, ten years after its issue we have the Third Edition of the Roman Missal for the Ordinary Form despite some hiccups in Canada and games being played. It is not enough but it is a beginning. If we could only celebrate it as it was intended, sung, ad orientem, with incense and solemnity and we would make a big mark on the "reform of the reform."

The Usus Antiquior continues to gain attention and in Toronto, Una Voce has been working hard to promote and sponsor the Mass. A new Una Voce Chapter has started in the Diocese of London, Sudbury now has the Mass as does Winnipeg and the Bishop of St. Catharines has raised the FSSP Apostolate to Personal Parish status and given them a property; God bless Bishop Bergie.

Serra House in Toronto is full to capacity and while next year will only see one diocesan ordination in Toronto, things are looking much better. The Archbishop and the Vocations Office are doing the right things.

On the cultural front, we continue to battle. The Catholic-In-Name-Only Premier of Ontario continues to "bully" Catholics as he himself succumbs to the homo-fascists and this battle has only just begun. On this fight, the Bishops of Ontario have let us down.

Friends, this blog has been saucy and a little irreverent at times. One person wrote that it is an "occasion of sin" and one of my bigger "fans" has been very harsh too, but I suspect that I will never hear from him again now. I have tried to stand up and fight for the Church, the truth and our culture. Sometimes I have succeeded and sometimes I have failed. Next year will be better but the battle for the truth and the liturgy and an end to abuses will go on.

On a personal note, it has been very busy. Work has been demanding and fruitful and I've been enjoying a relaxing break due to many, many vacation carryovers. Despite a detractor a few weeks ago on this blog who really acted inappropriatly, much was accomplished and I engineered the largest budget and program for my portfolio in over 20 years. My staff performed admirably and I thank them.

On the liturgical front, I am extremely fortunate to work in both Forms of the Roman Rite and with full support from the Pastors. I am truly blest and I thank them both.

May God bless you, Dear Reader this Christmas and always.

May you be happy and joyous. May you be blest with your families and friends. If you are alone, remember that you really never are alone. The LORD and His Mother love you and are with you. At the worst times, the darkest times of sin my life, no matter what my circumstance or my sin, they were there. God came for you and me, for all of us. He humbled Himself to be born of amongst us as a man to save us from sin, from ourselves and to show us the way to Him. Let us remember this truth always.

God love you.

Merry Christmas.

David Anthony Domet

Make him Mr. Lahey Now!

2011-12-20T20:58:00.002-05:00

I was going to post little this week and generally stay away from controversial issues, but this has caused me to rethink that. Instead of his putrid defense and his waxing about renewing his past "homosexual" relationships, he should be accepting his sentence with no defense and spending after that civil penalty a life or prayer and penance in a monastery for his crimes against the Church, children and his own soul.

Well, he lives on in CBWIII, another reason to rid our churches of that wretched little book of his handiwork. Imagine, he was wrecking our liturgy whilst being a sodomite in bishops clothing and looking at little boys, naked, in sexual positions on his computer.

You know, this guy and Mr. Weakland really show how the buggery committed by these sodomies really darkens the conscience.

Perhaps Salt + Light might want to think this post that this man is "a kind and gentle pastor, particularly sensitive to the needs of those who have suffered the scourge of sexual abuse."

Seraphic is equally disgusted and has kept her cool, I will write no more, I cannot keep my cool.

At the risk of committing a sin, I will refrain from writing anything else on this except for this:

Defrock him now!

Read the putrid story here.

Toronto Missa Cantata-Epiphany of the LORD

2011-12-20T09:28:00.001-05:00

Una Voce Toronto has announced that a Missa Cantata in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite will be celebrated on Friday, January 6, 2012 at 7:30PM at St. Lawrence the Martyr Catholic Church.

If you are in Toronto, please make an effort to attend and support the growth of the Traditional Latin Mass.

More information can be found here on Facebook or at http://www.unavocetoronto.blogspot.com/
.

SSPX Assessment of "Doctrinal Preamble"

2011-12-16T10:02:00.000-05:00

I don't often post on matters of the SSPX, but I do think that this is important and I have lifted it here from Rorate Caeli blog. No doubt, for those who have been following the issues for the last while can pretty well confirm that the difficult point is indeed what Bishop Fellay says below; “Yes, you can criticize the Council, but on one condition: it is necessary to accept it first.”

If you read this blog, you probably tend to agree that there are issues with the implementation and interpretation of the documents of the Second Vatican Council, at least as a minimum. The Holy Father has worked unceasingly to ensure the correct "hermeneuitic of continuity." Bishop Fellay and the SSPX are actually doing all of us a favour because they are forcing the Vatican to address the matters. On the other hand, they are also displaying a prideful and strident stance that is also disconcerting. Who is right? Can we blindly say that the SSPX is wrong because we follow Rome? Can the Vatican be right on all of this and the SSPX is in fact, schismatic and disobedient? Where does the truth lay?

Clearly, the Holy Father wants this matter solved and formal unity established and he has gone a long way towards this. Summorum Pontificum, the lifting of the Excommunications, and the Doctrinal Talks and this latest Preamble prove this. What has the SSPX given?

Will the Pope go one step further, or maybe two? Can he, will he simply lift all priestly suspensions and recognise all marriages and jurisdictional matter of the Sacrament of Reconciliation, or as some would prefer, Penance. What if he grants them a Personal Prelature and global diocese?

This whole matter is frustrating and going on far too long. It must be solved and soon, positions are hardening. If these talks to do not succeed, if there is not suitable good will and charity around all parties then the risk is that nothing further will happen and eventually, they will Consecrate another priest as bishop. If that happens, then it would seem that at this point, the Pope would be deeply hurt and left with no alternative but to declare that it is in fact, a formal schism.

Let us hope and pray that pride is reduced and charity abounds and that truth prevails.

From the sermon delivered by the Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), Bp. Bernard Fellay, on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception. These are the latest words of that Fraternity on the ongoing discussions with the Apostolic See.

You have all heard that there was a proposal from Rome, a proposal that said, “We are ready to recognize you [canonically].” The problem is that there is always a condition. This condition may have varied a bit in its formulation, but basically it is always the same. This condition is: you must accept the Council. One could sum up the current situation by saying: “Yes, you can criticize the Council, but on one condition: it is necessary to accept it first.” Which leaves us saying, “What can we criticize afterwards?”

I think that this is an honest summary of the present situation. And it is not difficult to describe for you our response.

Obviously, the formulas are more and more interesting, closer and closer to what we say. We have arrived by now at a point that clearly shows the depth of the problem. In that famous proposal this is what they tell us: “You commit yourselves to acknowledging that with regard to points from the Council that cause difficulties, the only way to understand those points is to understand them in light of the continuous, perpetual Tradition, in light of the preceding Magisterium.” The light of Tradition is the only way by which one can understand the dubious points. They even go further: “Any proposition and any interpretation of the dubious texts that was opposed to that perpetual Magisterium, that continual Magisterium of the Church must be rejected.” That is what we have always said. But there is a tiny little incidental clause that adds, “as the New Catechism says”. Now the New Catechism adopts the Council.

In other words, concerning the principle we can only agree. As for the application, it is completely the opposite. They claim that they are applying the principle by saying: everything that was done at the Council is faithful to Tradition, is consistent with Tradition, whether it be ecumenism or religious liberty. That shows you the seriousness of the problem. There is a problem somewhere. It is not possible otherwise. The problem is based on the understanding of certain words. And these words are of course “Tradition” and “Magisterium”. Their way of understanding these words is subjective. Certainly there are cases in which one can understand “tradition” in the sense of “transmit”: the act of transmitting is a transmission. But the usual way of understanding this word has bearing on its content. What is transmitted? What is transmitted from generation to generation? The classical definition of Tradition is “that which has always been believed by all, everywhere and at all times” (Commonitorium by St. Vincent of Lerins). Here the expression “That which” designates the object. But nowadays, it is as though we went from the object to the subject, so as to consider only the one who transmits.

That is why they talk to you about “living tradition”, because the one who transmits, when he transmits, is alive. Now life moves, it changes. The popes change… and therefore tradition changes, but it remains tradition. It is the same tradition, but one that changes. The Church has also taken this sense into consideration, but in an altogether secondary way. That is not what she is talking about when she talks about Tradition; what we call the deposit of the faith, the set of truths that the Good Lord has entrusted to the Church so that she might transmit it from generation to generation, so that souls might be saved. This content is what she means. And this is the reason why, with the definition of infallibility at the First Vatican Council, the Church teaches that the Holy Ghost has effectively been promised to St. Peter and to his successors, therefore to the popes. But He was not promised in such a way that the popes might teach something new by a new revelation. He was promised so that, with the help of the Holy Ghost, Saint Peter and the popes might preserve holily and transmit faithfully that which does not change, the revealed deposit.

That is where we are. That is what we are trying to do, since there is in fact a gesture made by Rome toward us, we must recognize it, a surprising gesture after these doctrinal discussions in which we determined that we were not in agreement. In effect it is a situation similar to that of two persons who meet, discuss something and arrive at the conclusion that they do not agree. What do you do then? Rome tells us: “You accept nevertheless!” And we reply: “It is not possible.” And so what we decide to do, besides answering that it is not possible, is to tell them: Wouldn’t you like to look at things a bit differently? Wouldn’t you like to try to understand that the Society is not the one that is a problem. There is indeed a problem in the Church, but it is not the Society; we are not a problem because we are saying that there is a problem. Then we ask them to deal with the real problem. We are ready; we want only one thing and it is precisely to attack the real problem.

You understand very well that humanly speaking there is no great hope that they will agree to change such a position. Maybe the disappointments that the Church has experienced will move them? The fact that currently the disaster, the sterility is more clearly evident: there are no more vocations. It is frightening. I saw, a few moments ago, the statistics for the Sisters of Charity, the nuns who used to be everywhere in France: between thirty and forty years of age I think that there are still three left in all of France. Between the ages of 40 and 50, likewise three. The majority, in other words almost 200, are between 70 and 80 or between 80 and 90. Some of them are more than 100 years old, and they are more numerous than those who are 20, 30, 40 or 50 years old. If you take the ones from 20 to 50 years of age, you have one more than the group of those who are 100 years old or more: 9 as opposed to 8. Those nuns who used to do all sorts of charitable works in all the rural areas!

And it is over. That is one example among thousands. Take the priests. Take instances from whatever area you want: it is a Church that is dying, disappearing. Nevertheless that ought to make people reflect. We think, we hope that some are beginning to reflect. People do get the impression that that is just not enough. Of course, grace is needed. It is necessary to pray.

Pray! Pray that the Good Lord will truly deliver the Church, that the Blessed Virgin will do something. She is the one who promised that her Immaculate Heart would triumph at the end to get the Church out of this disaster. For us who are involved in this great battle for the Church, it is an extraordinary honor to be able to be members of this Society today. And so let us ask the Most Blessed Virgin Mary that we might be worthy members of this Society. Let us live faithfully according to its statutes. Follow the seminary rules, as it is expected of you, with all your heart, while practicing the great charity that the Statutes of the Society require of us. Let us request it from the Most Blessed Virgin Mary so that really, every day, we might please God, that we might sanctify ourselves and thereby might be able to win souls for the Good Lord, those souls that are entrusted to us, for the greater glory of God, for the honor of the Most Blessed Virgin and that of the Church. Amen.

[Source & translation: DICI, Dec. 15, 2011]

Divinum Officium and daily Missa - On-line Resources

2011-12-15T05:04:00.001-05:00

The Internet has brought many resources to those interested in the Liturgy of the Church in all its Forms.

Here is a website which has the daily Mass according to the Roman Missal of 1962 and even the Divine Office from the ancient Monastic, to Trent to the Rubrics and New Calendar of 1962.

What an enormous work and to give due credit to the founder, let us read from their page.

This website was created and designed by the late Laszlo Kiss. Mr. Kiss, longtime resident of Forrest Lake, Illinois, died suddenly at his home on Monday, 11 July 2011, shortly after returning from a walk with his wife Marta. He was three days shy of his 73rd birthday. Mr. Kiss was born in Budapest, Hungary, on 14 July 1938, and married Marta Noske on 31 January 1968. He worked in Budapest as a computer engineer until emigrating to the United States of America in 1982. In 1983, he developed "Image," one of the first computer-controlled manufacturing systems in the world (still in use to this day). He retired in 2000, and, among other things, selflessly devoted hundreds of hours to creating the website divinumofficium.com, which provides free access to many different versions of the Divine Office (or breviary), the traditional daily prayer book of the Roman Catholic Church. His funeral was held at St. Peter's Catholic Church in Volo, Illinois, on the Feast of Our Lady of Mt. Carmel (16 July). Mr. Kiss is survived by three brothers in Hungary, and in the States by his loving wife Marta (of forty-three years), their two sons Zoltan and Chaba, and their two grandchildren Sophie and Ryan.

On Monday, August 15, 2011, the Solemnity of the Assumption of Our Lady, The Divinum Officium Project was founded, with the permission of Laszlo's son Chaba, to preserve and further Laszlo's work and to promote the worship of the Triune God through the Divine Office. Currently, The Divinum Officium Project consists of a diocesan priest as well as three software developers who maintain the site and ensure its accuracy.

T.A.D.M.N.

May Mr. Kiss rest in peace.

From the new and improved ICEL

2011-12-14T06:12:00.001-05:00

A Facebook friend posted a column by Father Raymond J. de Souza in the Catholic Register. In a manner we've come to appreciate from Father Z, Father de Souza remnds us what the prayer really says.

This coming Sunday, the Fourth Sunday of Advent has a very special Collect in both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms of the Roman Rite

Last year and for the forty-one years before, in the Novus Ordo Missae, this is what we heard:

Lord,
Fill our hearts with your love,
and as you revealed to us by an angel
the coming of your Son as man,
so lead us through His suffering and death
to the glory of His resurrection,
for He lives and reigns…

This Sunday coming, we will hear this:

Pour forth, we beseech you, O Lord,
your grace into our hearts,
that we, to whom the Incarnation of Christ your Son
was made known by the message of an Angel,
may by His Passion and Cross
be brought to the glory of the Resurrection.
Who lives and reigns…

Does it sound familiar?

It should as it is commonly known as the Angelus Prayer said three times a day.

What the translators at ICEL did to the Mass in English and us was a crime and a pretty blatant one at that, too!

That Blessed John Paul II rectified this not only with the Third Typical Edtion of the Roman Missal but more importantly, Liturgiam Authenticum and the Vox Clara Commission is one more reason why he his Blessed.

How many more nice surprises in the new Roman Missal are in store for us?

Scarboro Foreign Mission Syncretism

2011-12-10T12:14:00.001-05:00

One post below is the evidence of liturgical abuse of the Holy Mass in the new Roman Missal translation by the Superior General of the Scarboro Foreign Missions, once known as the China Mission" a Society of Apostolic Life in the Archdiocese of Toronto.

Based on their infamous "Golden Rule" poster where Catholicism is just one of a number of options, what else can we expect?

I wonder what Monsignor Fraser would think?

"The Golden Rule" poster promulgated by the Scarboro Foreign Missions

"For All" or "For Many"...whatever

2011-12-09T14:22:00.001-05:00

I have said it before and I will say it again.

A corrected translation is not enough.

Why does this priest change the words of the Opening Greeting, the Penitential Rite, the Offertory, the Consecration?

He chooses not to say "for many" but does not say "for all" just, "for you."
We have a mixing of the old and new.When is this going to end?

Why does Salt + Light TV which broadcasts this daily, not deal with this problem? Can they even? I appreciate that this is again, not a Salt + Light production but surely over the years, they've known about this kind of liturgical carelessness and innovation. I feel for them; they need to broadcast the Mass and they buy it from the National Catholic Broadcasting Council.

Well, who exactly are they?

The priest here is Father Jack Lynch, Superior General of the Scarboro Foreign Missions once known as the China Mission.

Father Lynch, this is causing great distress amongst the faithful, read the comments on Youtube. This is a against Sacrosanctam Concilium the teachings of Blessed John Paul II and the GIRM. Please stop changing the words. Please celebrate the Mass according to the words.

The one above, the first week of the new Roman Missal was no mistake or accident. He does it again below:

jlynch@scarboromissions.ca

National Catholic Broadcasting Council

1-888-383-6277

Salt + Light Your Catholic Channel of Hope

(416) 971-5353 or toll free 1-888-302-7181

52. All of this makes clear the great responsibility which belongs to priests in particular for the celebration of the Eucharist. It is their responsibility to preside at the Eucharist in persona Christi and to provide a witness to and a service of communion not only for the community directly taking part in the celebration, but also for the universal Church, which is a part of every Eucharist. It must be lamented that, especially in the years following the post-conciliar liturgical reform, as a result of a misguided sense of creativity and adaptation there have been a number of abuses which have been a source of suffering for many. A certain reaction against “formalism” has led some, especially in certain regions, to consider the “forms” chosen by the Church's great liturgical tradition and her Magisterium as non-binding and to introduce unauthorized innovations which are often completely inappropriate.

I consider it my duty, therefore to appeal urgently that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity. These norms are a concrete expression of the authentically ecclesial nature of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning. Liturgy is never anyone's private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated. The Apostle Paul had to address fiery words to the community of Corinth because of grave shortcomings in their celebration of the Eucharist resulting in divisions (schismata) and the emergence of factions (haireseis) (cf. 1 Cor 11:17-34). Our time, too, calls for a renewed awareness and appreciation of liturgical norms as a reflection of, and a witness to, the one universal Church made present in every celebration of the Eucharist. Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which conform to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church. Precisely to bring out more clearly this deeper meaning of liturgical norms, I have asked the competent offices of the Roman Curia to prepare a more specific document, including prescriptions of a juridical nature, on this very important subject. No one is permitted to undervalue the mystery entrusted to our hands: it is too great for anyone to feel free to treat it lightly and with disregard for its sacredness and its universality. Blessed John Paul II, ENCYCLICAL LETTERECCLESIA DE EUCHARISTIA

Why are "trads" so ignorant and nasty?

2011-12-09T08:10:00.001-05:00

While this blog has often been critical of many actions in the liturgy particularly the manner in which the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite is often celebrated, this time my attention is going to be turned in a different direction.

Do we go to Mass to worship and pray or do we go to make a fuss to others about little things?

Many of us have been bothered by liturgical abuse in the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite. The correct response is to note it and deal with it after Mass with the priest or bishop. On the other hand, you can do what I've often done, get up and leave.

However, this little column is going to be a little different from what is usually posted here because it needs to be said and that is liturgical abuse by the laity in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite. But first, let me rant a little more so you get the picture of where I am coming from.

Some people who attend the Traditional Latin Mass can try ones patience.

Now, I have never considered myself a "Trad" or a "Traditionalist," someone has even had the temerity to label me a "Neo-Cath." Another labelled me as having "modernistic tendencies." Other have said that I am a "Trad" and other that I am not "Trad" enough.

Well, they can think whatever they want, I am a Catholic.

But while these labels are rather unfortunate, I'm going to nevertheless, use one.

"Trads" can be a nasty group and give the cause a bad name.

Last night in Toronto a beautiful Mass was held for the Feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary. It was a Missa Solemnis at St. Lawrence the Martyr in Toronto. The three Sacred Ministers were joined by three priests "in choro." The Servers were excellent as usual and the organist and choir were splendid.

It's the cranks that show up that are the problem.

So, let me rant because this is my blog.

1. Look friends, many people that come to these Masses are first timers. If they don't read the note in the liturgical handout about not singing the Pater Noster and they sing it, so what? But when you "trads" all go sssshhhhhh what you did was actually a vile intrusion on the Holy Mass. They acted in singing out of innocent ignorance, you acted out of rudeness, malice and what you did was a debasement of the liturgy. Stop it! What you "trads" did was a liturgical abuse.

2. Gothic Vestments are NOT NOVUS ORDO. They are called "Gothic" for a reason. In fact, the conical style "Novus Ordo" vestment as you refer it is actually of more ancient use than the "Roman" or "Fiddleback." Now, stop the whining about these little things and smarten up.

3. Artwork that shows the Blessed Virgin Mary's hair in paintings of the Immaculate Conception are not "Vatican II" and do not indicate that I am a "modernist." Until the puritanical Victorian 19th century with its feminine featured Jesus and its burka clad young Virgin and the über-puritanical attitude of you 21st century "Trads" the Immaculate Conception was portrayed as a pre-pubescent girl, a young virgin and without a veil as in the post two below this one which is a more recent rendition of the style of the many in the same style from the 15th century onward.

4. A Read Mass (Missa Lecta) with Dialogue is not a "Novus Ordo" invention. Nor is standing for the Pater Noster and the Postcommunion a "Novus Ordo" invention. The Church has desired that the people respond to the priest even though you have your preference for absolute silence. This is not where we are now or where the restoration will be. So you can drop this paranoia about NovusOrdoIsms. This is not a liturgical experiment or innovation. Read the rubrics!

You would think that these "trads" would be overjoyed with what has been happening since Pope Benedict XVI issued Summorum Pontificum and the recent Universae Ecclesiae.
As an example, when was the last time a Solemn High Mass in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite was offered in the Archdiocese of Toronto before last night? How about over 40 years ago!

Now behave yourself and be joyful for what has been accomplished, if you can be.

Some "trads" are really an offering up.

There, I feel better now.

More on St. Michael's Cathedral Music

2011-12-09T07:25:00.001-05:00

A few weeks ago, I posted an article about changes at the Cathedral in Toronto over some unfortunate tinkering to the sacred music program provided by St. Michael's Choir School. Dorothy Cummings Maclean has written a feature in the Catholic Register on the Cathedral and the Choir School. (N.B. the picture embedded in the online edition is an error and is actually of Notre Dame Basilica Cathedral, Ottawa.)

An ancient treasure chest of music

Written by Dorothy Cummings McLean

Living as I do across the Atlantic Ocean, I still manage to keep abreast of events in Toronto. The Internet is like a seashell, sighing in my ear.

The most recent news is that St. Michael’s Cathedral is altering the order of its famous music, provided since 1937 by St. Michael’s Choir School.

Please visit the Catholic Register to read the whole article.

Dorothy Cummings McLean originally from Willowdale in Toronto now lives with her husband in Edinburgh,, Scotland where she attends the parish administered by the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. Her brother attended St. Michael's Choir School and there she developed her love of the liturgy and sacred music. She is the author of the blog Seraphic Singles and the book of the same name; and the blog Seraphic Goes to Scotland.

We did not know each other at the time, but we both attended St. Michael's Cathedral in the 1980's. Me, as a returning Catholic and she as the sister of a choir boy.

The result of course, was the same.

O Mary, conceived without sin...

2011-12-08T07:16:00.001-05:00

You are all beautiful, Mary,
and the original stain is not in you.
Your clothing is white as snow,

and your face is like the sun.
You are all beautiful, Mary,
and the original stain is not in you.
You are the glory of Jerusalem,
you are the joy of Israel,
you give honour to our people.
You are all beautiful, Mary

Missa Solemnis in Toronto - Immaculate Conception

2011-12-06T11:28:00.001-05:00

A Solemn High Mass (Missa Solemnis) will be held in Toronto on the Feast of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary this Thursday, December 8 at 7:30PM.

The Mass will be celebrated at St. Lawrence the Martyr Scarborough at 2011 Lawrence Avenue East, just west of Kennedy Road on the north side. The Mass is sponsored by Una Voce Toronto and a reception will follow in the Church Hall. More infomration is here and here on Facebook.

The Liturgical progrma of Sacred Music includes:

Organ Prelude: Alvus Tumescit Virgo - Michael Praetorius (1571-1621)

Processional Hymn: The God Whom Earth and See and Sky Quem terra, pontus, aethera -Venantius Fortunatus, 539-609
Missa cum Jubilo-Gregorian Mass IX
Credo III
Gregorian Chant Propers - Liber Usualis
Ave Maria - Jacques Arcadelt-Pierre-Louis Dietsch
Jesu Rex Admirablis - Giovanni Pierluigi da Palestrina
Alma Redemptoris Mater - Tonus Simplex
Immaculate Mary - Lourdes Hymn
Organ postlude: Ricercar pro Tempore Adventus super Initium Cantilenae: Ave Maria klare - J.K.F. Fischer 1656 - 1746

Archbishop Prendergast read the GIRM!

2011-12-05T15:32:00.001-05:00

Archbishiop Terence Prendergast, S.J. of Ottawa may need read this blog (or perhaps he might) but he sure read the GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal) and understands fully the mind of the Church on these matters. Thanks to SoCon for the information.

May the Archbishop be richly blest for his clarity, his teaching and his leadership and loyalty and may other bishops in Canada follow his example: (bolding is my emphasis).

Letter to the Archdiocese of Ottawa

on the Implementation of the Third Edition

of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal

Dear brothers and sisters in Christ:

The First Sunday of Advent sees the introduction of a new translation of the Roman Missal for the English-speaking members of the Archdiocese. I am confident that the priests of the Archdiocese have been preparing the faithful on the new prayers and responses contained in the new translation. November 27 is also the date on which a new version of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal comes into effect.

After discussing with priests how to carry out these changes in our liturgical life, I have determined that, in the Archdiocese of Ottawa, we will do this in stages, gradually putting into effect practices that the Universal Church is inviting us to adopt so as to enrich the sacred liturgy as an offering pleasing to God.

I will be writing you several times in the new liturgical year, proposing an ordered implementation of new directives, some of which will come into effect in Advent, others in Lent, still others during Eastertide and at Pentecost.

In the meantime, I encourage priests, religious and the faithful to read and reflect upon the Third Edition of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM). The General Instruction of the Roman Missal may be found in the new Roman Missal, is available as an offprint from the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and may be downloaded from the website of its Liturgy Office [cf. www.romanmissal.ca/GIRM.pdf]. Liturgy committees will profit from studying it carefully in order to understand the new norms in context.

On this occasion, I wish to draw your attention to several matters: the General Instruction’s invitation to unity in the congregation assembled for the Eucharist—including in posture; the call in the General Instruction for reflective silence at Mass; the Creed to be recited on Sundays and major feasts; and a change with regard to the lectionary in the entrance procession.

The General Instruction offers a wonderful expression of the ideal of unity in the People of God gathered for Eucharistic worship in paragraphs 95-96, which read as follows:

In the celebration of Mass the faithful form a holy people, a people of God’s own possession and a royal priesthood, so that they may give thanks to God and offer the unblemished sacrificial Victim not only by means of the hands of the Priest but also together with him and so that they may learn to offer their very selves. They should, moreover, take care to show this by their deep religious sense and their charity toward brothers and sisters who participate with them in the same celebration. They are consequently to avoid any appearance of singularity or division, keeping in mind that they have only one Father in heaven and that hence are all brothers or sisters one to the other.

Moreover, they are to form one body, whether in hearing the Word of God, or in taking part in the prayers and in the singing, or above all by the common offering of the Sacrifice and by participating together at the Lord’s table. This unity is beautifully apparent from the gestures and bodily postures observed together by the faithful.

The ideal, then, is realized in part when the faithful manifest their unity by common postures. The postures to be observed at various parts of the Mass are spelled out in #43; we are familiar with most of these, including the call to kneel for the consecration (which in the Archdiocese of Ottawa means from the end of the Holy, holy, holy until the acclamation of faith following the Consecration).

What is new is that, except for kneeling at the Consecration, the General Instruction says that the faithful should stand ―from the invitation, Orate, fratres (Pray, brethren) until the end of Mass‖. How this is to function in practice will have to be worked out in particular circumstances, as #43 also says that the faithful may sit ―if appropriate, during the period of sacred silence after Communion‖. Some liturgical experts have suggested that the congregation remain standing until the last person has received Holy Communion at which point people kneel or sit in reverent prayer. When queried whether people may kneel or sit on returning to their place after receiving Holy Communion as, generally speaking, we have been accustomed to doing, the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship said that the expression of unity should not be so emphasized that people are not free to kneel or sit in prayer after Communion.

The note about silent prayer following Communion is part of a wider call for reflective silence at key points in the Mass: in recollection before the Penitential Act; after the celebrant says, ―Let us pray‖; following the readings and the homily. The General Instruction calls us to reflection and an unhurried pace in order to foster true liturgical devotion (cf. #45 and 56).

The new Roman Missal indicates that the Apostles’ Creed, following a long-standing tradition, is appropriate to Lent and Easter. Accordingly, I ask that the Nicene Creed be proclaimed on the other Sundays and holy days of the year when the profession of faith is to be said.

This year our Pastoral Theme—―The Word of God grew and multiplied‖ Acts 12.24—strives to have us focus on the power of God’s Word in our lives. I will speak about this in my next reflection on liturgy in January 2012. The liturgy gives priority to the Gospel and so the description of the entrance procession stresses the Book of the Gospels over the lectionary (cf. GIRM #120 d). Accordingly, the lectionary may no longer be brought in procession but should be placed on the ambo. If a Book of the Gospels is available (the English Sector of the Canadian Church hopes this will be available in a couple of years), it is carried in procession and placed on the altar until it is brought to the ambo.

Changes in the liturgy, dear brothers and sisters, are demanding as they interrupt habitual practices which have become second nature to us. So, I counsel patience at this time and openness to what the Lord is asking of us for our greater spiritual good in this transition.

When he published Third Edition of the Roman Missal, Blessed Pope John Paul II wished this new book of liturgical prayer to open us to new prayer formulas and to liturgical celebration of newly-canonized saints. He saw it as the ongoing manifestation of the renewal of the Sacred Liturgy desired by the Second Vatican Council.

Let us pray that the Holy Spirit will move us to grow more fully into our dignity as the holy people of God by our embracing these new prayers and modified liturgical practices.

Devotedly yours in Christ,

Terrence Prendergast, S.J

Archbishop of Ottawa

On the Solemnity of Christ the King

November 20, 2011

The Prairie Messenger: Source of the Problem?

2011-12-03T06:41:00.001-05:00

Much has been written on this blog over the last ten months on the matter of kneeling in Canada. Some have perhaps found it boring, some have found it informative and helpful. Regardless, I have been blogging on this because I have believed it to be necessary.

While I have no proof, it is my opinion and there are others, including some priests and deacons who share my view, that the professional Catholics in Canada had no desire to see the new Missal or GIRM implemented until at least 2012 when they could see how it went in the United States, as if there was going to be a problem. I suppose they were looking for a backlash so they could say to Rome, "see, we are right not to implement."

They were ordered by Rome in February to implement on Advent I, they had no choice. A meeting was held at the Congregation which included the President and General Secretary of the CCCB where it was made clear to them. It is my view that many resent this and will do only the minimum and in fact, will do less by setting up obstacles to what the GIRM really says or, as in the case of Fred Henry in Calgary, do his own thing.

So, where does this issue on kneeling come from?

The writer below is not the originator of this view but he was a proponent of it here in Canada; though clearly this theology view was certainly all the rage for a long-time, still is in many parts and it has infected many. It is the biological solution that will fix this.

This monk has left a progeny of dissent and their numbers are declining and quickly. They know that their work has been straw but they cannot admit it to themselves.They are still clinging to power but they see that power being stripped away.

They profess to do all this for us, the "laity" and they condemn "clericalism" but they actually hate the laity who love the Church and they are the worst form of clericalists. They are Protestants but did not have the honesty to get up and leave.

You see, they realised it to late and like the manager of whom Our LORD spoke, they are too proud to big and too old to work. So, they stay and suck the life out of the Church for a room and board and while they are still here they sow their seeds of discontent.

Unfortunately, this monk uses historical inaccuracies and does not go into the detail to explain why we may have certain practices. Just because the East does something does not mean it is necessary in the West. The East did not experience Luther and did not have to counter massive disbelief in the Real Presence or Ministerial Priesthood. If we were meant to do as the Last Supper, then we should have Holy Communion "reclining at table" sitting on the floor.

He makes claims and attributes them to Fathers of the Church but he provides no references nor the context of their alleged statements for the reader to verify. We are to take his word for it, his interpretation. He is after all, a cleric.

This Benedictine monk display an incredible ignorance of history and liturgy and he makes continual references to sexuality and displays a rather prophetic phrase from the news recently; you'll pick it up, just don't be drinkin' your coffee over the keyboard.

For your lazy Saturday morning with coffee, here are three articles below from Andrew Britz, OSB (St. Benedict, pray for us). Here is what Catholic Insight had to say about Father Britz. Given that one book of his writings has blurbs from Joan Chittister, who provided the Foreword and Mary-Jo Leddy who calls it a "textbook in political discernment," you kind of get the direction from where he comes. (the lack of capitalisaton of Eucharist is from the PM -- even blogger's spell check wants to capitalise it, Blogger knows!)

Corpus Christi (Prairie Messenger, June 7, 1993)

The eucharist is the centre of our church life, the symbol that signifies the fullness of Christian life. In celebrating the eucharist the church is expressing itself at its deepest level. The eucharist makes present to a celebrating community the full benefits of the Lord’s passover from death to the newness of life.

These three modern expressions, which could easily be expanded, indicate how important the eucharist is to Christian life. The “old” theology, which nurtured most of us pre-Vatican II Catholics, in its own way also highlighted the eucharist’s centrality: the mass is the unbloody sacrifice of Calvary; bread and wine lose their fundamental natural meaning and are transubstantiated into the real presence of Christ; one cuts oneself off from the Christian community and from God (commits a mortal sin) if one intentionally misses Sunday mass.

One might have a personal preference for the old or the new, but in neither school of expression can one avoid an important truth: the mass or eucharist is central to church life, and what we express in that liturgy has monumental ramifications for the communal life of the church and for the self-understanding of each individual Christian.

One would expect, in such circumstances, that the church would struggle mightily in every age and culture to give the eucharist its broadest and fullest expression so that everyone might be personally flabbergasted at the meaning Christ gave them when they became part of his body in baptism. Yet a study of church history shows that the exact opposite is the case. In most of our history the eucharist was given narrower and narrower expressions.

Rather than highlighting the communal nature of Christian worship, the liturgy became more and more the domain of the clergy and an expression of clerical power. It became something the clergy did for the people. For a priest to celebrate mass became the greatest privilege in the world.

What a surprise that must be for Jesus Christ who gave us a religion he so carefully grounded in reality through such everyday sacramental signs as breaking bread together, drinking wine among friends, indulging the body with the best perfumes, massaging the sick lovingly with oil, making love with uncontrollable climaxes of pure sexuality!

Once the clergy had full control of the liturgy they quite naturally, over many centuries, reshaped it to fit their own image of the perfect church. The everyday work and workplace of the vast majority of the church members no longer rated.

We can speak only for the western world in which we live: we live in a church in which a strong majority of women, especially those professionally trained, experience the church as a community biased against them. We get excited by the divisions the ordination of women is causing in the Church of England, and yet remain blind to the much deeper divisions that continue being enacted in our liturgy and in the exercise of authority in our church.

But it is not principally a problem of our communities of religious women. It is a church problem. Bright young women cannot come to trust a church which they see preferring men to women. They are not about to enter religious life.

We must address fully and honestly the place of women in the church. We must acknowledge as wrong all that has made them feel they are not called to celebrate as full citizens of God’s reign. If women cannot celebrate Corpus Christi (being the Body of Christ) with joyful abandon, it is a sign that we have not been faithful to the Lord.

- - -

Kneeling at the eucharist (Prairie Messenger October 2002)

In their latest newsletter the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Liturgy declares that in normal circumstances “the only licit posture” during the eucharistic prayer is kneeling; the preface with its ancient opening dialogue is apparently not seen as part of the prayer. Churches built in recent times without kneelers must now have them added to the structure (see page 5).

While demanding considerably more kneeling than is suggested to national conferences of bishops in the Vatican’s updated General Instruction of the Roman Missal, the American bishops see any variance from the prescribed norms as either “a private inclination or an arbitrary choice.”

Those seem like harsh words indeed for those pastoral liturgists who are convinced that standing at the eucharist has been indisputably the traditional practice of the universal church for more than half of its history, and is still the uniform practice of the Eastern churches.

One must wonder what the universally recognized “heavyweight” among eastern doctors of the church, St. Basil, would think on reading that to believe it is right and proper to stand at the eucharist is no more than “a private inclination or an arbitrary choice.” That same Basil once declared — admittedly in an excessive outburst of rhetoric — that it is a mortal sin for a Christian to kneel publicly anywhere during the Fifty Days of Easter, or anytime during the whole year (Lent included) during the eucharistic prayer.

No wonder that the first privilege excommunicated Christians lost was that of standing among the faithful at the eucharist. But lest one think that this is only eastern theology burdened with the thinking of such bishops as the Cappadocian Fathers, one does well to remember that, at the heart of the Roman Canon, the only eucharist prayer of the Roman Rite for more than a thousand years, the People of God are called the circumstantes: those standing around the table of the Lord.

Saint John Chrysostom, the church’s key theologian on the meaning of the priesthood of Christ, interpreted the first-century dialogue that opens every eucharistic prayer in both the East and the West as the People of God’s empowering of their clergy to celebrate for them the Sacred Mysteries of the Lord’s death and resurrection in the eucharist.

While GIRM suggests to the bishops’ conferences that they have the people kneel from the Sanctus to the end of the Last Supper Narrative, the American bishops call for kneeling until the Great Amen — ostensibly to give a uniform sign to the whole eucharistic prayer.

One can understand that the American bishops could find no rationale for rising after the Last Supper Narrative, but their solution is even more difficult to understand. They end up asking the People of God to stand for the introduction to the prayer, which is to set the tone for what is to follow, and for their complete acceptance of the prayer in the Great Amen, which St. Augustine says should reverberate throughout the church like a thunderclap.

To kneel during a prayer that is introduced, situated and given its colour by the ancient dialogue and the preface, and then to rise in order to accept it surely makes little sense.

Of course, the reason given for kneeling is to show profound adoration. The eucharist is unquestionably the heart and soul of our liturgy and thus requires our most profound response. But is begging for mercy and/or adoring God on our knees our most profound response?

The ancient dialogue and the preface would indicate otherwise. They clearly call us to enter into the mystery of Christ with joyous thanksgiving, and in a celebratory mode that places the Christian community not as foreign visitors beyond the communion rail but at the heart of the celebration.

St. Augustine says it beautifully in one of his Eastertide homilies: “It is your mystery which has been placed on the altar of the Lord; you receive your own mystery. You say Amen to what you are” (272).

Anthropologists remind us, again and again, that celebration is the deepest action of the human person. Many of those who advocate kneeling at the eucharist do so because they are afraid that thanking God “for counting us worthy to stand in his presence” (Eucharistic Prayer II) is too shallow a response. St. Augustine’s homily, on the other hand, states that by centring, first of all, on the grace we have already received, our reverence for the special presence of Jesus Christ in the eucharist will only be deepened.

One can only hope and pray that the Canadian bishops will hold fast to their traditional teaching that the deepest expression of the Christian people on the Lord’s day is to stand with heads held high in God’s presence, in loving service of Jesus’ “flesh given for the life of the world” (Jn 6:51). — AMB

- - -

Standing at the eucharist (Prairie Messenger November 2002)

If one looks up the word “kneel” in a New Testament concordance, one can find quite a few references, many of them speaking in a positive manner of the first Christians — and, indeed, of the Lord himself — kneeling in prayerful worship of God Almighty.

Yet for many centuries we have no record of the Christian community, which certainly knew its Scriptures well, kneeling at the eucharist. Indeed, church leaders and theologians went so far as to say it was a sin for a Christian to kneel at the eucharist.

In the West, Augustine spoke of kneeling at the Lord’s Supper as a denial of one’s Christian dignity. It is our mystery that is placed on the altar; we, in Christ, celebrate who we are.

In the East, which normally saw things in a broader perspective, the act of kneeling at the eucharist was deemed a denial of the Lord’s resurrection; you cannot sing “Alleluia” on your knees. Thus St. Basil went so far as to declare it a mortal sin to kneel publicly during the Fifty Days of Easter or during the eucharistic prayer.

When suddenly, with the Peace of Constantine, the Christian community was able to come “above ground,” they spontaneously did something unheard in the ancient world: they constructed their places of worship without an explicit god-symbol. They saw themselves, assembled in Christ’s name, as his living presence. No wonder they could not kneel.

We know, however, that before the first millenium had run its course, the laity were beginning, here and there — but not for many more centuries in Rome’s major basilicas — to kneel at the eucharist.

Something quite revolutionary had to have taken place for the church to change a universal tradition — indeed, one that its great church fathers had deemed could be broken only under pain of sin. As kneeling is once more being explicitly promoted as the preferred posture for the laity at mass, it is important to study carefully what led the church to make a 180° turnaround.

Much of it had to do with the development of the theology of the ministerial priesthood. Greatly influenced by the wave of pagan priests who saw the writing on the wall with the Peace of Constantine and “converted” to the new religion, the developing theology of the priesthood emphasized the eucharist as sacrifice and that only sacred people could carry out the required rituals.

The priest became the active agent in the liturgy, doing sacred things for the laity who assumed a passive role. If those in authority (now all clerics) did not see the priest as the only truly active agent, they would never have allowed the central act of worship to be conducted in silence in a language unknown to the People of God.

Little bells were rung three times during the liturgy, encouraging the laity to take note what the priest was doing at that moment. The rest of the time they were to be gainfully occupied with their own private devotions.

A large crucifix was hung over the priest’s head, giving the laity something worthy of their attention during the mass. The highlight of the mass was the elevation of the host, which the priest with the sacred power given him in ordination had changed into the Body of Christ. There was virtually no connection any longer between the consecrated host and the faithful assembled in community.

Indeed, the split had become so great that even the vessels on the altar were deemed so holy it was a sin for an “unconsecrated” lay person to purposely touch them. And, of course, the very sanctuary (cut off from the assembly by the communion rail) was so holy that it was a sin for a woman to enter it during the liturgy.

The Body of Christ no longer had any relationship to what the laity were. It was what they received. And, as the final putdown, they received it not in the hand so that they could feed themselves, as would any adult, but rather in the manner in which parents feed their children — directly into the mouth.

When this process of change was complete — it took several centuries — the church had turned itself inside out. Priests no longer drew their liturgical power by gathering the faith of the community. (St. Augustine once said that in the sacraments the word does not get its power by its being spoken by the priest but in its being believed by the people.) Priests no longer acted in the name of the community; they did things for the community.

The laity were no longer central to the liturgical act; they were no longer expressing their deepest meaning, thus becoming the sacrament they were celebrating. Rather, they were reduced to receivers. The most active function left to them was to look upon the host and adore. And what could be more appropriate for that than kneeling?

The Second Vatican Council and the Roman congregations in the years after the council looked carefully at all these developments that led the church to put aside its universal tradition of standing at the eucharist. Many things were changed, some quite obvious. Women were allowed to read during the liturgy, and, to the consternation of many, were allowed in the sanctuary and could be ministers of communion.

The most important change, however, was not so obvious. The laity, assembled in Christ’s name, had once again become central to the celebration. Indeed, the Vatican documents began talking about everyone actively celebrating, with the priest being the “principal celebrant.” With this shift in theology, Augustine’s and Basil’s words on standing while celebrating their own mystery made perfect sense.

Congregations overwhelmingly took to standing not because it was easier (many find it harder) but because it seemed appropriate. It fit.

The church, and especially our bishops, must look closely at why kneeling is once again being promoted as the proper posture at the eucharist. If, as many suspect, it is to reverse the theology of the laity that has come out of the council, there simply is no room for compromise. — AMB

- - -

There is a lot above to digest but it is clear that this monk and those whom he has influenced have a view of the church that is a rupture. This is not what is envisioned in Sacrosanctam Concilium or the Third Edition of the Roman Missal or the GIRM.

What he does not tell you is that up to 1975, there was no "rubric" for the laity to kneel at all. The 1975 GIRM and the 2002 GIRM mandate kneeling at the "Consecration" as a minimum. But the GIRM recognises the "laudable practice" of particular communities and regions over decades, centuries even to maintain the practice which they have developed. He is contradicting himself. In fact, the Church is recognising the "community" in allowing this kneeling to continue.

It is the "liturgists," nuns and monks and priests confused over their own vocations and obviously, their sexuality who have wreaked havoc on the people of God whom they desire to empower. They are like the manager to whom Our LORD parables, too proud to beg, too old to work.

They are the worst form of clericalists. They are always right and the laity loyal to our Holy Mother, the Church are wrong.

They have left no progeny to take up their dissent. They are old, sick and dying, the bishops whom they have influenced are gaining in age and in ten years will be nearing or past retirement.

Last Sunday, I met a 16 year old who desires to be a priest and on Tuesday, I had dinner with a Deacon to be ordained in May, the future is in good hands.

The LORD has not abandoned His Church.

Is the Bishop of London listening?

2011-12-02T14:03:00.003-05:00

A few minutes ago I received a letter from a friend in the Diocese of London. She has written to Bishop Ronald Fabbro, CSB on the matter of hard-handed actions and words by some priests to enforce an instruction from the Chancery.
She writes: "He also mentioned how change is difficult and he knows more catechesis is needed, etc. That's fine, the main thing is that he respects the fact that people can kneel if they choose. Now, people need to encourage him to let all the diocesan priests know since some are being bullies when people choose to kneel. I'll still be encouraging people to send in incidences of bullying, threats, accusations, etc., to Bishop Fabbro and if they wish to Rome, too. And, to consider sending Bishop Fabbro a message about their disappointment in his wishing to change a long-standing custom of kneeling after Communion." Now, make no mistake, this is not over; we need to see what next Sunday brings in London.But, let it be known, the Internet is giving us the laity the ability to stand up and be counted and to address this. Now, what are you Catholics doing about this in Calgary, Sault Ste. Marie, Saint John, Kamloops, Antigonish, Halifax, Winnipeg, Moncton, Regina...

"So while desiring to see a move toward this unified posture, it would never be my intent to forbid kneeling following the reception of Holy Communion." Most Reverend Ronald Fabbro, CSB, Bishop of London in Ontario.

What Arinze said...

2011-12-01T17:18:00.001-05:00

What is Rome's position on forcing people to stand after recieving Holy Communion?

Question: Does everybody have to stand until the last person has received Holy Communion?

Francis Cardinal Arinze: "There is no rule from Rome that everybody must stand during Holy Communion. There is no such rule from Rome. So, after people have received Communion, they can stand, they can kneel, they can sit. But a bishop in his diocese or bishops in a country could say that they recommend standing or kneeling. They could. It is not a law from Rome. They could -- but not impose it. Perhaps they could propose. But those who want to sit or kneel or stand should be left reasonable freedom."

http://www.adoremus.org/1003Arinze.html

Hey Moncton: Stand Up for Yourselves and Kneel Down!

2011-12-01T14:21:00.001-05:00

Here we have news reaching us today from Moncton giving me another reason to publicly thank Archbishop Thomas Collins.

I imagine the "link" will only work for a few more days. Catholics in the Maritimes have sure had their pain to endure not the least of which has been the preying on their children by wicked homosexual priests. The liturgy is a mess, church attendance is poor and vocations are almost non-existent.

6. Posture of the Communion Rite: The time of receiving communion is a sign that unites us as we all come to be fed at the Lord’s table. This is not about a private, devotional time between me and Jesus. It is a time that we, the Body of Christ, come to share in the Body of Christ, and so to go out to be the Body of Christ to the world. We do this as a community of faithful disciples. This is also another time in the liturgy when we take the same posture as the presider. And so we remain standing until the last person has received communion. At this time we will all then be seated for sacred silence, a time to give thanks for this blessing that God offers us. Of course, there are those in our midst who would not be able to stand for this period of time. It is most acceptable that they are seated as they need. The rest of the community remains standing as we sing together, notice our sisters and brothers who approach to receive the Body and Blood of Christ. We stand with our music ministry who lead us in song during this time. We stand as resurrected people. We stand in unity with all who come to the table. And we sit to give thanks in silent prayer once all have been fed.

Hey Moncton; any vocations?

When was your last ordination?

Let's remember our Catholic brothers and sisters in Moncton and Saint John and Halifax, and Antigonish and Newfoundland in prayer that they will soon have priests who will work to rebuilt His Church there.
Now, good people in Moncton; from a half Maritimer (my late mother was born in Fredericton) go and sit down and write, then stand up for your rights and kneel down for your LORD, if you choose to do so.

Antonio Cardinal Cañizares Llovera
Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments
Palazzo delle Congregazioni,
00193 Roma,
Piazza Pio XII, 10
Vatican City

It's "my church" you silly cookie worshipper!

2011-11-30T11:49:00.001-05:00

The news from London Diocese headed by Basilian, Bishop Ronald Fabbro just keep coming. There is no doubt that those who serve and advise the Bishop in liturgy have to give an accounting to him, to the people and most of all, to the LORD.

Members of my family, in the London diocese, were all commanded to stand for the reception of Holy Communion; their parish priest berated them that such behaviour would not be tolerated in "his church." As if that were not shocking enough he labelled them, "cookie worshipers"! This latest proscription on kneeling after communion does suggest this may not have been an "isolated incidence." Although this case was the most egregious of many, it does suggest organic growth from a corrupted tree. "No one eats this flesh without having first adored it...and not only do we not sin in thus adoring it, but we would be sinning if we did not do so." St. Augustine on The Sin of "Spiritual Pride" in the Diocese of London!

Your Excellency; I know this is not what you intended.

Elizabeth at 10:02 who left this; please write to me privately and urgently at voxcantoris (at) rogers (dot) com

The Sin of "Spiritual Pride" in the Diocese of London!

2011-11-29T06:03:00.001-05:00

A reader in the comment box of this post writes:

Give us some concrete suggestions on what to do Vox! Do we speak to our priest? Do we write the bishop? Do we write to the Vatican? Or do we just keep griping about it on the net?

One priest in the London Diocese told everyone they would be guilty of the sin of spiritual pride if their postures did not match those of the congregation; btw what is the address for the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith?

Okay, let us deal with the practicalities later, first I want to deal with the priest's statement.

The Bishop of London, Ronald Fabbro, a Basilian, has instructed all priests to tell the people that they must stand after Holy Communion and remain standing until all have received the Holy Eucharist. He is not the only bishop in

Canada

to do this. Apparently, this is to be considered a matter of "disobedience."

The priest must carry out the bishop's instruction to communicate the decision of the bishop. The priest cannot disobey his bishop in this by advising you otherwise. However, how far does he go? He can advise you that this is what the bishop has asked. But, if he sends around little NaziMinistersofStandYouSprituallyPridefulCatholic, who is doing the sinning? Is that how we treat the Mass? To order it under the interdict of disobedience and calling it a "sin of spiritual pride" if one continues to kneel, is a bit of a stretch, don't you think?

Take this post, print it out and show that priest.

Look, I'm no theologian, far from it; and I've certainly been told in the past that my "keyboard and screen do not make me a bishop or a liturgist" either, but I can read and think and discern and so can you.

This action by the priest and this "order" by the Bishop is the worst form of clericalism imaginable. They once complained that it was pre-Vatican II clericalism from Rome that was the problem, but these guys are worse than Rome could ever have been accused of being. The bishop is not G-d! He is not infallible. The bishop is not the "Pope of his diocese" no matter how far he tries to stretch the concept. They disliked the alleged dictators of Rome because they wanted to be the dictators.

I tell you, Jesus must be weeping over these things.

People cried on Sunday after being harassed in this manner. I sure don't want to be the priest or bishop on judgement day going before the Master and answering for that.

No priest in that diocese can tell you to disobey. I can't tell you to disobey; you need to use your own conscience.

But I can tell you what I would do; With an informed intellect and conscience and in all humility to the Real Presence and Holy Mother Church, I would kneel.

Up until two years ago, Seminarians at St. Peter's Seminary in the Diocese of London were prohibited from kneeling during Mass at the Seminary, even at the Consecration which was the minimum required by the 1975 GIRM.

Who was being disobedient then in preventing kneeling?

Now what does the GIRM actually say in this matter? (my emphasis)

Gestures and Bodily Posture
42.           The gestures and bodily posture of both the Priest, the Deacon, and the ministers, and also of the people, must be conducive to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, to making clear the true and full meaning of its different parts, and to fostering the participation of all. 52 Attention must therefore be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and by the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice.
               A common bodily posture, to be observed by all those taking part, is a sign of the unity of the members of the Christian community gathered together for the Sacred Liturgy, for it expresses the intentions and spiritual attitude of the participants and also fosters them.
43.         The faithful should stand from the beginning of the Entrance chant, or while the Priest approaches the altar, until the end of the Collect; for the Alleluia chant before the Gospel; while the Gospel itself is proclaimed; during the Profession of Faith and the Universal Prayer; and from the invitation, Orate, fratres (Pray, brethren), before the Prayer over the Offerings until the end of Mass, except at the places indicated here below.
                The faithful should sit, on the other hand, during the readings before the Gospel and the Responsorial Psalm and for the Homily and during the reparation of the Gifts at the Offertory; and, if appropriate, during the period of sacred silence after Communion.
                In the dioceses of

Canada

, the faithful should kneel at the Consecration, except when prevented on occasion by ill health, or for reasons of lack of space, of the large number of people present, or for another reasonable cause.53 However, those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the Priest genuflects after the Consecration. Where it is the practice for the people to remain kneeling after the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) until the end of the Eucharistic Prayer and before Communion when the Priest says Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God), it is laudable for this practice to be retained.
For the sake of uniformity in gestures and bodily postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the instructions which the Deacon, a lay minister, or the Priest gives, according to what is laid down in the Missal.

It says that "attention must be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and by the traditional practice of the Roman Rite." The General Instruction in 43 states that "Where it is the practice for the people to remain kneeling after the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) until the end of the Eucharistic Prayer and before Communion when the Priest says Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God), it is laudable for this practice to be retained." It states that where the practice has been to kneel before Communion when the priest says Ecce Agnus Dei, that that it is "laudable for this practice to be retained."

If it is "laudable (worth of praise) to be retained" then what it is its opposite?

Let's be clear, it states that you kneel before Communion, it does not say you then stand upon returning.

88. When the distribution of Communion is over, if appropriate, the Priest and faithful pray quietly for some time. If desired, a Psalm or other canticle of praise or a hymn may also be sung by the whole congregation.
89. To bring to completion the prayer of the People of God, and also to conclude the whole Communion Rite, the Priest pronounces the Prayer after Communion, in which he prays for the fruits of the mystery just celebrated.

Nowhere here does it state that you are to remain standing until all have received and then site to "pray quietly for some time." In 89, the priest "pronounces the Prayer after Communion" with "Let us pray" then, we stand!

There is an agenda here that is not in keeping with the words of the General Instruction or its intent.

This matter was dealt with in 2002 by Cardinal Arinze when then Prefect of the Congregation of Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

Francis Cardinal George, Archbishop of Chicago, Chair of the USCCB Committee on the Liturgy wrote:

Dubium: In many places, the faithful are accustomed to kneeling or sitting in personal prayer upon returning to their places after having individually received Holy Communion during Mass. Is it the intention of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, to forbid this practice?

Francis Cardinal Arinze, Prefect of the CDW, responded to the question on June 5, 2003 (Prot. N. 855/03/L):

Responsum: Negative, et ad mensum [No, for this reason]. The mens [reasoning] is that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on the one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.

Now, who is guilty of spiritual pride?

Bishop Ronald Fabbro, CSB
1070 Waterloo Street

London, Ontario
N6A 3Y2
Tel: (519) 433-0658
Fax: ( 519) 433-0011
bishop@dol.ca
bketelaars@dol.ca

Archbishop Pedro López Quintana
Apostolic Nuncio to

Canada

Apostolic Nunciature
724 Manor Avenue
Ottawa, Ontario K1M 0E3
Tel.: (613) 746-4914
Fax: (613) 746-4786
apostolic.nunciature@rogers.com

Antonio Cardinal Cañizares Llovera
Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments
Palazzo delle Congregazioni,
00193 Roma,
Piazza Pio XII, 10
Vatican City

Draft letters.

Make calls.

Get to work!

Read the GIRM and listen to your conscience.

Who is really guilty here of “spiritual pride?”

Catholics in Canada: Rise Up and Kneel Down!

2011-11-28T12:17:00.001-05:00

Go here, my Canadians sisters and brothers, and join Canadian Catholic Preserving the Custom of Kneeling after Communion!

A Metropolitan See and its Wayward London Child

2011-11-27T19:37:00.001-05:00

Thank you and a prayer for God's abundant blessings on Archbishop Thomas Collins of Toronto for having the grace, faith and pastoral sensitivity to recognise the "laudable practice" in the GIRM that the kneeling custom in Toronto is to be maintained. That is, from the end of the Sanctus to the end of the Doxology and from the beginning of the Ecce Agnus Dei. After Communion, the faithful may kneel or sit. as they are inclinded, as is their personal choice.

Our grown up American brothers and sisters are much more fortunate that the Holy See has already ruled on ths ludicrous behaviour by episcopal dictators. Gee, they seem to find something in the GIRM to enforce that isn't there but they can't enforce the minimal use of Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion or Gregorian chant?

Meanwhile, the poor people of the See of Toronto's wayward child have had gestapo like "ministers of uniformity" going around telling them to get off of their knees. The Diocese of London under Bishop Ronald Fabbro of the Congregation of St. Basil as High Priest of liturgy has ordered under the rubric of "obedience" that people must all stand after Holy Communion until all have received and returned to their pews as a sign of "unity" and "community."

Woe too, to those in Calgary who suffer from a bishop who states, "The GIRM says this...In Calgary, we do this..."

Reports are reaching us today from Calgary, Antigonish, Halifax, Winnipeg and other places of this rudeness and intrusion on the part of some of Canada's high priests of liturgy.

God bless Archbishop Michael Miller of Vancouver for recognising "laudable practice.'

As referred to in the link above, this little matter has been dealt with by Rome previously and quite effectively at that same link by Francis Cardinal Arinze, whlilst he was Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments. Letters will be written. Rome will be called in to intervene.

Look at this from a Facebook feed about the situation in London today:

Sadly, in my diocese last evening, some left Holy Mass in tears and angry after being forced to stand after receiving Our precious Lord in the Eucharist and were prohibited from kneeling. Shame on the priest and our bishop!

I just knelt anyway, the liturgy belongs to all of us, and the Holy See said we can kneel if we wish. I have never like bullies. The priest and I had a good discussion afterward and he at least seemed interested in finding out what Rome has said about this "no kneeling" after Communion liturgical fad. I'll be emailing the documents to him today.

One parishioner, in his 70's, was so upset at Holy Mass after being told the bishop said we can't kneel after Communion anymore, he yelled out during the priest's homily, "Father, why can't we keep kneeling together as a sign of unity?" The priest just responded, "This is what the bishop said we have to do for unity." Unity? Give me a break. Ripping away a centuries old custom from people, which takes place during a most miraculous moment in their lives, does not create unity. It creates harm through division, anger, and deep hurt. God save us!

Gentle Reader, this is not what the GIRM requires. This is not in the new Roman Missal. The bishops who do this are being insensitive and cruel. They are not doing what the Church wants. It is an ugly power-play.

It is my view that many, many bishops, priests and professional Catholics and liturgists resent in every way the Third Edition of the Roman Missal and the translation mandated by Liturgicam Authenticum. They were forced to implement it when as recently as last February they denied any sense of urgency when the Recognitio was still not granted. Some will stop at nothing to ensure that that which is to surround the Missal to increase reverence and holiness does not happen.

If they are so eager to interpret what is not in the GIRM when will they actually interpret correctly what is in there such as Gregorian chant?

Dear Reader, you have a responsibility to stand up get in the battle in a way that our parents and grandparents were not out of blind obedience and ignorance.

Here is one way.

CANADIAN CATHOLICS PRESERVING THE CUSTOM OF

KNEELING AFTER HOLY COMMUNION

And with your spirit

2011-11-27T06:37:00.001-05:00

Let us now rejoice give thanks to God that the Novus Ordo Missae in English now has a translation that befits the celebration of Holy Mass.

What was the experience in your parish?

A blessed Advent to you all.

Vox.

Somebody reviles Vox; Blest am I

2011-11-26T07:35:00.001-05:00

A few days ago, whilst working on some other tasks on the computer, I heard in the background a program on Salt + Light which I blogged about here.

The next day, a pretty strange comment appeared in the combox.

Our good friend "Anonymous" either knows me or knows of me. Not only did he mention my name, which is not too hard to find, but he actually mentioned my employer and questioned my employment and my work ethic. I don't care about that, I won't respond to his calumny. But I do care about my employer and to those whom my work serves so well. I deleted the comment to protect my employer from scandal. I am re-posting it below with necessary censored parts to reveal to you, dear reader, the ugliness that the truth brings out.

Salt + Light has many, many good people working there. They are good Catholics, faithful and see their work as a true apostolate. Notwithstanding that, there needs to be more care on their parts for canned, non S+L produced programs and that was the point of the blog post.

Sometimes shining a light on a problem is helpful. It is not to attack the people or their organisation but to bring attention to a problem so that they can do better in the future.

There are people who resent Catholics who blog because our keyboards and our computer screens give us the ability to address issues in the Church which our predecessors were unable to do. You don't need to be a bishop or a liturgist to understand and to communicate the truth. Some resent this ability because it means that they can be challenged in the public square for comments they make and things that they do.

I make no apologies for my criticism elsewhere on this blog of Celebrate in Song or the National Liturgical Commission or the Bishop of Calgary's blatant disregard for the GIRM and I make no apologies for making you aware that a pro-abortionist, church-hating, anti-Catholic bigot appeared on a Catholic television station, no matter that there is no support for her position by the people at the network.

But who would leave such a message in public, in writing and in the combox?

Surely friend, if you wanted to write to me you could have done so in private, my email address is available through the blog.

Instead, you have committed public calumny.

I am not offended by it, but I am disturbed that someone who obviously took offense to my highlighting of the truth and my asking of an honest question would debase themselves in such a manner.

The tone of the letter is familiar to me.

Debate the point friend, but why would you stoop to such a low point as this?

Anonymous at 1:54

"My question(s), perhaps more relevant:

"Why would the XXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX employ Mr. XXXXX.XXXXX - at $90,000 per year -to sit on his fat ass and blog all day long instead of working? I mean, isn't he just stealing from xxx xxxxxxxx at this point?. shouldn't he at least have some type of task or deliverable work to do? Shouldn't he at least have to show up at work to get paid?"

As per Matthew 1, these are not my questions to judge. But I'm guessing that St. Peter doesn't look too kindly upon those who take from the Catholic Church and give nothing back.

Good luck, Mr. XXXXX, in your quest to judge others before judging yourself."

Oh, by-the-way, thanks for the raise.

Cardinal condemns "Ladder-climber's self interest"

2011-11-26T05:58:00.001-05:00

Cardinal Ouellet uses frank words about those who lust and lobby for the episcopate! (my emphasis)

Every bishop must defend the faith, Vatican official says

Vatican City, Nov 24, 2011 / 03:20 pm (CNA).- Cardinal Marc Ouellet, prefect for the Vatican's Congregation for Bishops, said that every bishop is required to proclaim the Church's teachings to modern society.

Bishops should be “capable of publicly defending the faith,” Cardinal Ouellet underscored. “In addition to the virtues that are normally demanded of a bishop, this capacity is particularly necessary today.”
In an interview with the Italian daily L’Avvenire on Nov. 18, Cardinal Ouellet described the involved process of selecting a new bishop which requires taking the opinions of numerous people into account.

“This research provides important elements for ruling out certain candidates and accepting and proposing others,” he said. “In some cases, additional inquiries need to be carried out. Altogether, it is a serious process that is normally done well.”

Some priests actually aspire to become bishops, he noted, saying that there can also be “movements or pressure to suggest or insist a certain priest be elevated.”

“For this reason, it is important to evaluate not only the human and emotional maturity, but also the spiritual maturity of the candidates for bishop,” he said.

Cardinal Ouellet noted he has also had some candidates turn down their appointments.

“There have been quite a few more than I expected,” he said. One of the main reasons for this trend is that “in recent years, the role of the bishop, and of authorities in general, both religious and political, is not at all easy.”

“Likewise because of the scandals, the media campaigns and the accusations of sexual abuse by priests and religious. It is understandable that not everyone wants to confront these situations.”

Ultimately, all bishops must realize that their mission is to serve Christ and the Church and not themselves, he stressed.

“Bishops should know who they are working for, that is, for the Lord and for the Church,” Cardinal Ouellet said. “Not for themselves. When this happens, it becomes apparent in the way in which their personality is expressed. The ladder-climber’s self-interest prevails or tends to prevail.”

Celebrate in Song: Two critiques of the new CCCB booklet

2011-11-24T23:36:00.001-05:00

Here is my article from the December 2011 edition of Catholic Insight. Permission has been granted for a reprint at http://www.canticanova.com/.

You can read it all, here:

Celebrate in Song: Two critiques of the new CCCB booklet
By Raymond Lévesque and David Domet
Issue: December 2011

Attending one of the workshops in Toronto at Annunciation parish on the music for the new Missal I was amused to find that one of the presenters, a "professional liturgist" in front of over 400 people would say; "they (ICEL) have even set the Nicene Creed to music; why anyone would want to sing the Creed is beyond me."

Indeed.

When questioned as to the Propers, she responded, "What are they?"

This from one of Canada's professional liturgists does not speak well for the rest of Celebrate in Song.

The three settings composed by Canadian composers are no closer to the ideal of what the Church expects and calls Sacred Music than that which is mostly now tolerated.

Salt + Light Features Pro-Abortion Communist and Anti-Catholic bigot!

2011-11-22T22:09:00.001-05:00

Why would Salt + Light Catholic Television* feature a program called "Context with Lorna Dueck" which features as a guest anti-Catholic bigot and pro-abortion advocate and communist and former head of the radically feminist National Action Committe on the Status of Women, Judy Rebick.

Is this appropriate "Catholic" television programming?

Just askin'.

* aired on Tuesday, November 22, 2011 @ 10:00 P.M. EST

I am not suggesting that anyone associated with Salt + Light somehow endorses Judy Rebick's anti-Catholic or pro-abortion position by having a non S+L produced program on which she appears. If that impression has been given, than I am correcting it.

However, prudence demands that those responsible for programming a Catholic television station give thought to those programs which they purchase from non-Catholic sources that may be and I use the word advisedly, "Christian," but do not necessarily share the same beliefs on the one true Church, the Papacy or the issues of Life.

Frankly, not censoring this program and therefore, allowing such a person to be shown on the network, no matter the topic, may not mean that one supports her positions but it certainly gives exposure to a person who hates the Church and what She, the Church, stands for and it creates, scandal just like the canonisation of the late Senator Kennedy.

Many people who call themselves Christians, hate the Catholic Church as She is to them, "the whore of Babylon." Some viewers of this program on CTS or Vision believe that the Pope is the "Antichrist" and that abortion is a "choice." This is not a Catholic program and has no business on a Catholic network.

Judy Rebick has displayed nothing but hatred and contempt for the Catholic Church throughout her work in the public square as a lobbyist and activist.

The appearance of this person on a Catholic television station is inappropriate, unless it were to be, her conversion story.

Vox.

Celebrate in Song---Conflicted Interest

2011-11-17T18:38:00.001-05:00

Well, well well...isn't this interesting. It seems that two of three composers of the less than appropriate Mass settings in Celebrate in Song are actually on the National Council of Liturgical Music under the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops. Now, how much did your parish pay for this? Um, did the Bishops not command that you "only" sing these? Does all this seem a little out of the ordinary?

Nah, it must be just me.

Nota bene: Perhaps those who have foisted upon Catholic in Canada the banality of Celibate in Song might be interested in this:

Vatican instructions on liturgical music, architecture coming soon
November 22, 2011

The Vatican will soon unveil a “liturgical art and sacred music commission,” and issue new guidelines for the construction of churches and the renewal of liturgical music, according to Andrea Tornielli of La Stampa.
Tornielli—who has compiled an enviable record for predicting new developments in the pontificate of Benedict XVI—says that the new commission will mark an important step in the Pontiff’s long-cherished plan for a “reform of the reform” in the liturgy.

The commission will be part of the Congregation for Divine Worship, Tornielli reports. He notes that in September, Pope Benedict relieved that congregation of its responsibility for several canonical issues, explaining that the Congregation for Divine Worship should devote its energies primarily to “giving fresh impetus to the promotion of the Church’s sacred liturgy.”

That congregation, under the leadership of Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera, will now issue instructions on liturgical music, architecture, and art, Tornielli reports. These instructions will be designed to insure that all artistic elements are oriented toward a reverent celebration of the liturgy.

Toronto: A Renovation Gone Awry!

2011-11-17T18:19:00.001-05:00

Update: I note that in the bulletin for the Solemnity of Christ the King, the 5:00 and 12:00 Mass with the Senior Choir, did include the Gregorian Introit and a polyphonic Gloria and Agnus by T.L. da Victoria. So, is it the 10:00 Junior Choir that is being simplified? Let's see what evolves here. The Cathedral must always present the highest standard of liturgical worship at every Mass and that is not represented by Celebrate in Song.

"Music ministry evolves with the changing times and needs of the Church. With an open mind, a generous spirit, and a shared determination, we will continue to hold together both service to the gathered community and a commitment to musical excellence." Father Michael Busch, Rector of St. Michael's Cathedral.

St. Michael's Choir School music program at the Cathedral gutted!

It's as if the writer of the quote above acknowledges that what he is writing about must be "held together" because he knows beforehand that he is wrong and that what he is doing is going to be controversial. He then imposes a guilt that if one disagrees, then one does not have a "generous spirit." This is such a typical ploy of the liturgical wreckovators who mislead the faithful 30, 40 and 50 years ago.

In what seems like a replay of 1965 or 1969 or 1971 or 1980 of misinterpretation of texts, the Rector of St. Michael's Cathedral has caused a rupture with those Rectors and the good Monsignors that came before him. At a time when Pope Benedict XVI speaks of a "hermeneutic of continuity" this is more of what he rightly called, a "rupture!"

On the eve of the corrected translation of the Third Edition of the Roman Missal and the corresponding music for it, old canards have been raised to attack over 70 years of labour and love in this Archdiocese. "Liturgies must never be allowed to become a pursuit of art for art’s sake or a mere performance suitable to the appropriate setting or space." he writes. As if this is what it has been all about.

Is he saying that St Michael's Choir School (SMCS) is guilty of this? Is he saying that Msgr. Ronan and Msgr. Armstrong and the wonderful Rector, Msgr. Robitaille were guilty of this?
In my experience at the Cathedral, it has never been like this.

What is being "renovated" (the physical infrastructure) with one hand has become a wreckovation with the other. Over 70 years of musical tradition and liturgical faithfulness and excellence has been rudely and without justification, discredited.

The wrecking of the work for the Glory of God of Monsignor John Edward Ronan, Monsignor H. Barrett Armstrong, the saintly Miss Mann, Mr. Harry Hodson, Mr. Brian Rae, the late John Arab, and the current Staff, the Alumni, the students of St. Michael's Choir School and the parents who have sacrificed is not intolerable. The liturgical wrecking ball seems to be finallys swinging at the Cathedral.

The new Missal is being used to usher in other changes that could not or were not attempted here before -- a debasement in the liturgical program of sacred music.
So what does all this mean and what has changed?

When I came back to the Church in 1982 after missing the entire 1970's I still thought the New Mass was that of 1965. I couldn't figure out at the Cathedral why the Altar BOY was not switching the Missal from the Epistle to Gospel side as I did back in 1966-68. I did not know what a Novus Ordo was let alone what had gone wrong with it. But I was blest. The Holy Spirit used the beauty of the windows, the art of the ceilings and the music of the boys of St. Michael's Choir School to stir my heart back to Him.

How is this "art for art's sake?" Is beauty not from God as Pope Benedict XVI has reminded us?

It was "art," the art of the windows, ceiling and voices in this Cathedral that brought me, and I am sure many others, back to Church.

At the time of my return, the Rector was Monsignor Kenneth Robitaille. I distinctly remember a few things. The Introit, Offertory and Communion antiphons were always sung in Gregorian chant as organised for the Novus Ordo Missae from the 1974 Graduale Romanum. The Gloria and Agnus were always polyphonic except when the choir was away in the summer and even then, it was Mass VIII--Missa de Angelis. In Lent, the Kyrie was polyphonic, the Credo was always Credo III, sung in Latin antiphonally, choir/congregation, the Our Father was sung in English and the final blessing was Dominus vobusicum...sung and the dismissal was sung, Ite Missa Est in Latin. There was a polyphonic motet at Offertory and Communion and a hymn in English at the Processional, after Communion and at the Recessional. The Introit was chanted after the hymn as the priest or Cardinal (Carter) incensed the Altar.

At some point in the 1990's the Creed was no longer sung, the Apostles' Creed said in its place. The Our Father was no longer sung, nor was the Kyrie, but the Introit, Communion and sometimes the Offertory in Gregorian chant and the Gloria and Agnus in Latin polyphony and the Latin motets remained.

A few days ago, I checked on the web site of the cathedral to update myself on the physical renovation. I was stunned to see the music program. Gone was the Introit and Communion replaced by hymns, never, ever the first or best choice if you can do better. Gone was the Offertory chant. No Gloria in Latin polyphony, no Agnus in Latin polyphony and in their place the banal and poorly composed ABC settings from Celebrate in Song!

This is not what the Church asked for. This is not in keeping with the principles of sacred music either chant, congregational or polyphony. This is not Vatican II. This is a false hermeneutic.
This is also not what the Popes through the Third Edition of the Roman Missal, the General Instruction (GIRM) or ICEL, the International Commission for English in the Liturgy mandated. \And for what? The music in Celebrate in Song? Are you kidding me?

Where does it say that the choir cannot sing alone? In fact, the GIRM specifically states that at certain points including the Gloria and Antiphons, that these may be "sung by the choir alone!"

The Antiphons are Proper to the Roman Rite, not hymns, why are we going backwards? According to the GIRM for Canada, "In the dioceses of Canada Mass begins with the Entrance chant from the Graduale Romanum or the Graduale Simplex." This is the same command at the Offertory and Communion. The GIRM goes on to state, "or another liturgical chant" that is consistent with the liturgical action. The other "liturgical chant" is not defined, but hymns are not "liturgical chant."

A month ago, Father Samuel Weber was in Toronto to talk to priests about chant. My sources tell me that some priests were pleased, some in tears after singing the Office and some had scowls. Is this a rebellion to that fact?

Singing the poorly composed and privately commissioned Masses in Celebrate in Song does not befit the dignity of St. Michael's Choir School nor does it fulfil the reasons for which it was formed.
How paradoxical that while the former Director of SMCS is away studying Sacred Liturgy and writing a treatise at Mundelein the new Director tolerates this stripping away. Who is this new Director and what is his role in all of this. Is this the man to follow in the footsteps of Ronan, Somerville, Hodgson, Armstrong, Rae, Mann and others?

If SMCS stands by; if the people who know and love the school stand by, if the people who worship at the Cathedral stand by, if Catholics in Toronto and Canada who know the standard there stand by and do nothing about this, then we will all be poorer for it.
Our parents and grandparents stood by while Father This and Sister That tore down our heritage and threw it away. Tabernacles in metal salvage yards. Communion Rails as parking curbs. Altar Frontals cut up as Christmas decorations. A priest in Toronto ordering the Janitor to take down the beautiful Stations of the Cross to replace them with ugly modernist symbols. The Janitor refused--the priest did it! Churches white-washed. St. Paul's Baslica Italian white marble Altar and Communion Rail gone forever. Holy Name turned into a bare space.

Will we do the same or will we restore?
Gregorian chant and polyphony are not to be ghettoised in the Extraordinary Form. It was always meant to be part of the Novus Ordo. Read the documents of Vatican II, specifically, Sacrasanctam Concilium.

Go google "Jubilate Deo Pope Paul VI" and see what you find and see if we follow his direction on the "minimum amount of Gregorian chant" that the faithful should know.

Maybe the "Trads" are right. Maybe the Novus Ordo Missae should be done away with all together. Maybe it should die along with the generation that has abused it so much.

It really never had a chance.

This is just another example along with Bishop Henry of the Church in Canada thinking it is the Toronto Catholic Church or the Calgary Catholic Church or the Canadian Catholic Church.

For that clarity, I make no apologies.

On the Corrected Translaton of the Roman Missal

2011-11-17T08:32:00.001-05:00

Courtesy of The Chant Cafe and FaithUK is this important article from Father Tim Finigan writing in the September/October edition of Faith Magazine. As approach the last week of a translation of the Holy Mass in the Ordinary Form (Novus Ordo Missae) which has been a destruction to the faith Father Finigan brilliantly summarises its deficiencies and what it has meant. It is important that you make your friends aware of not only what is coming but the history and outright consipiracy to destroy the liturgy.

The New (corrected) ICEL Translation

Tim Finigan FAITH Magazine September – October 2011

Fr Timothy Finigan, Parish Priest of Blackfen, sketches the slow process, following Christopher Monckton's 1979 expose in this magazine, of correcting the 1970s mistranslation of the text of the liturgy. He also touches upon the opportunities offered by the translation for healing some of the deep ecclesial wounds of recent decades. Fr Finigan has a popular blog, The Hermeneutic of Continuity.

People have grown old and died waiting for an accurate English translation of the Missal of Pope Paul VI. Most Catholics under 40 years of age have never been able to participate at Mass said according to a faithful rendering of the official Latin text. This injustice to the People of God is now being rectified, and not before time.

The imprimatur for the first full ICEL Missal in England was given by Cardinal Heenan in October 1974. The introduction of the whole Missal was not necessarily immediate. In England and Wales, the former, and much better translation of the National Liturgical Commission (NLC), known colloquially as the "Wheeler Missal" after Bishop Wheeler who played a significant part in producing it, remained legitimate as an alternative. In the September-October 1975 issue of Faith Magazine, Fr Holloway wrote: "To my mind, it is a blessing that our Bishops have not yet allowed ICEL complete and total dominion, although for how long can NLC hold out?" In fact, it did gradually fall into general disuse, although some priests carefully retained copies of the Wheeler Missal. In recent years, they have become as gold dust for younger clergy. (It is still legitimate, I suppose, until the first Sunday of Advent, though I wonder whether anyone has even remembered to mandate its suppression.)

Early Criticisms of the Old ICEL

Though the NLC Propers could be used, the Ordinary of the Mass had to be ICEL. Criticisms of ICEL in the early days therefore often focussed on the texts of the Creed or the Eucharistic Prayers. Even so, this was in the days long before the first web browser was invented, and the reaction was slower than we are accustomed to now. People did complain about the translation, focussing on its banality and lack of a sense of the sacred. Latin Mass (even in the new rite) had become a rarity by the mid 1970s and so it required an effort to get hold of a Latin Missal to compare the texts. As more and more interested Catholics did so, there was a sense of outrage at what was missing, changed or simply invented. In 1979, Christopher Monckton, then Editor of the Universe, focussed the complaints of many of us in his widely influential paper for the Association of English Worship, published in this magazine (Dec 1979) as "Caught in the Act. A Conspiracy of Errors." (He compiled a list of over 400 such errors.)

The main point of his article was that the ICEL translation (of the Ordinary of the Mass) was not only banal, nor even simply erroneous; Monckton demonstrated that it was marred by systematic omissions, and systematic doctrinal defects. The words sanctus and beatus had been passed over in almost every place where they occur in the text. As he observed, "there was only one point at which the translators must have found it all but impossible to omit the word "Sanctus" and that is in the SANCTUS itself." They could hardly have expected the priest and people to say: "____,____,____," My own favourite example of desacralising is the translation of the text in the Roman Canon "accipiens et hunc praeclarum calicem in sanctas et venerabiles manus suas" which is properly translated in the new ICEL as "he took this precious chalice in his holy and venerable hands." The old ICEL has "he took the cup."

Monckton also drew attention to the theologically grave problem of the text's playing-down of sacrificial language, eliminating the distinction between the offering made by the priest and that made by the people, and losing the notion of Christ as victim. The most glaring example is the phrase ''sanctum sacrificium, immaculatam hostiam" in the Roman Canon, which is simply omitted.

Ever since Monckton's article and others like it in the late seventies, it has been an open secret that the translation was bad, and needed to be replaced. Even at that time, with the text not six years old, the Chairman of ICEL indicated that it was to be subject to a careful and painstaking re-evaluation; it took eighteen years for a new text to be presented to the Holy See. By 1998, however, many things had changed: Pope John Paul's papacy had matured, and the Congregation for Divine Worship, after a series of other good prefects, was now run by Cardinal Estevez. In his letter to ICEL, the Cardinal gave 114 examples of specific flaws in the proposed text, saying that the list "cannot be considered in any way exhaustive." He specifically noted "It appears, indeed, consciously or unconsciously to promote a view of sacramental and ecclesiological theology that contrasts with the intentions of the Holy See." Among the many defects, he noted the dropping of the words sanctus and beatus: the "careful and painstaking" eighteen year re-evaluation did not seem to have achieved very much.

Before offering his cordial good wishes in Christ the Lord, Cardinal Estevez wrote:

"... this Congregation considers it may be helpful to recommend that there be a complete change of translators on this project and that a new, independent and definitive English version be made afresh from the Latin texts."

Not long afterwards, in 2001, the instruction Liturgiam Authenticam was issued, insisting that

"the original text, insofar as possible, must be translated integrally and in the most exact manner, without omissions or additions in terms of their content, and without paraphrases or glosses. Any adaptation to the characteristics or the nature of the various vernacular languages is to be sober and discreet."

The following year, ICEL was reconstituted with due acknowledgement of the competence of the Congregation for Divine Worship, and the process of translation began for a third time. The growing use of the internet, especially in social networking, meant that through the debates of the US Bishops' Conference (commendably held in public session) the general Catholic public became increasingly aware of just what thinking was behind what was coming to be known by consensus as the "lame-duck translation", an expression popularised by Fr Zuhlsdorf who has spent many years analysing "What does the prayer really say?" both in his column for The Wanderer and on his popular blog. When Bishop Trautman of Erie complained about unfamiliar words being used, bloggers jokingly vied with each other to include the words "ineffable", "wrought" and "gibbet" into ordinary posts. The opposition to the more sacral language was characterised as objecting to "them fancy words."

A Great Relief for Priests and People

Now, after several decades, we finally have an accurate translation of the Roman Missal to use for the celebration of Mass. During the lead-up to its introduction, some of the liberal Catholic press has been acting in a way reminiscent of the "phony war" of 1939. They have not been issuing gas masks and practising air raid drills, but from the hysteria of some articles, you would think that extra first-aiders should be trained. I am not exaggerating here. The Tablet actually posted an article on its website in which the author suggested that asking children to say in The Confiteor "through my fault, through my fault, through my own most grievous fault" while beating their breasts, was a form of psychological child abuse. Wisely (perhaps realising that this foolish comment trivialised real child abuse) The Tablet took the article down.

Most ordinary Catholics who are still actually going to Mass will not be troubled by the changes to the text, except for stumbling a bit for the first few weeks and accidentally falling into the old ICEL from time to time. The priest can do a lot to help in the reception of this change. If he is obviously enthusiastic and positive, the people will be encouraged in their faith, and can benefit from the catechesis that he gives in his ordinary preaching, looking at topics like sacrifice, grace, humility, and the sacredness of the Liturgy, to give a few examples of doctrines that show out much more clearly in the new texts.

For the minority who take an active interest in the Liturgy, read Catholic articles and follow news within the Church, I suspect that the people who are delighted by the new ICEL will far outnumber those who are opposed to it. For priests who are faithful to the Church, and have been aware of the errors and deficiencies of the old ICEL, it will be a relief and a joy to be able to use a worthy text for the celebration of Mass in English. For the 27 years of my priestly life, I have been using a lame-duck text that dumbs down the theology of the Mass and prevents me from giving to God the reverence due to Him in the words of the prayers prescribed by the Church. I rejoice that the students I have taught, who are being ordained this year will begin their priestly ministry with a worthy text.

Unfortunately, there has been little progress on the question of copyright to the text, which belongs to the local Bishops' Conferences. The cards which have been produced by the major publishers have various problems because of conditions imposed by the National Liturgical Committee. They imply or state that the offertory prayers must be said out loud, that the sign of peace is compulsory, and that Holy Communion must be received standing. They are also unwieldy because of ICEL's insistence that the texts must be printed according to "sense lines." (This constraint also make the Missal itself waste acres of white space.) Last year, when the "phony war" ponderously urged elaborate preparation for priests to be able to use the new texts, I pointed out at one clergy meeting that I had done the preparation many years ago by taking English O-Level. The stubborn insistence on "sense lines" is surely a form of that "infantilisation" which was fostered by the collaborative ministry enthusiasts but is so decried nowadays.

Paradoxically, since Summorum Pontificum, it is easier to obtain high quality pdfs of the texts and music for the extraordinary form of the Mass and the Divine Office than for the ordinary form in English. There will undoubtedly be an underground movement to share electronic versions of the text so that booklets and leaflets can be produced and distributed on the internet free of charge. (There is already a text of the newly-translated Missal available on Wikispooks) It would make sense for ICEL and the English speaking Bishops' Conferences (or any one of them) or the Holy See itself to put an official version of the text out into the wild under a licence that allowed non-commercial copying with the caveat that the text itself should not be modified (it is in fact much easier to verify the integrity of an electronic text.) Hunting people down for copyright violations is a waste of time that could be better spent supporting the work done by enthusiastic Catholics free of charge for the love of God.

In a way, the liberals are right to fear the new (corrected) ICEL text. They do not want any change in the status quo because it will inevitably provide an opportunity to make other changes, most notably to the music that is used for the Mass. If parishes begin to recover the idea of a sung Mass, rather than a Mass at which things are sung, that will be a great improvement to the celebration of the Liturgy. Once bumped out of the groove in which we have been stuck for decades, it will be easier for parish priests to take up some of the reforms which have been encouraged gently by Pope Benedict, to be frightened no longer by traditional vestments and vessels for Mass, by the possibility of at least some celebrations of Mass being ad orientem, or by gently moving away from anti-liturgical informality.

During the decades in which we have been lumbered with the lame-duck translation, much has changed in the Church: some of the changes have ironically been a matter of people continuing to do the same thing. Those who as youngsters were attracted by the folk choir and have remained in it, can sometimes now look like the ageing rockers who play at teatime in seaside pavilions in the summer. They may still harbour the pious hope that young people will be attracted by matey liturgy and jolly tunes. The sad reality is that in most parishes there are hardly any young people left after the Confirmation course has finished. The ones who do remain will stay because either through a miracle or the providence of God they have received some formation in the faith: they want the truth and they want to worship God. Some school chaplains or diocesan youth centres have tried hard to move towards better and more catechetical music for worship but the danger remains that this is of transient appeal and can become quickly outdated and a source of amusement unlike the perennial sacred music of the Church which was actually mandated by Vatican II.

The debate over whether liturgy or catechesis is most important for saving the faith of the young has taken a new turn in the recent revival of the Liturgical movement. The Liturgy has been rediscovered as itself a source for theology, and therefore also for catechesis. This certainly does not mean that the Liturgy is primarily a school assembly: making it such is one of the problems that we have to overcome. Rather, the priest in his preaching, and the catechist in sacramental preparation can use the texts of the Liturgy to illustrate the faith. This will be much easier with the new (corrected) translation which succeeds in preserving the dogmatic content of the prayers. Shortly after the time of the publication of the lame-duck translation, Faith movement produced a pamphlet called "The Liturgy: a catechism of Catholic doctrine." This showed that even in what was a bad translation, the basic doctrines of the faith could be found in the text. Now everyone is talking about the opportunity for catechesis that the new text presents.

Important though this is, it must be accompanied by a recovery of the sacred in the Liturgy: especially in the celebration of Sunday Mass, and even more crucially in the celebration of the school Mass. Many active young Catholics have found the numinous in the usus antiquior and have become attached to it, much to the bewilderment of older Catholics who remember the heady days of the seventies with nostalgia. Whatever the process of mutual enrichment between the Extraordinary and Ordinary Forms of Mass (as desired by Pope Benedict) will hold for the future, the present position of young Catholics is that they are going to keep or lose the faith through what they experience in the Mass celebrated at their parish and at their school. The new (corrected) translation offers us a definitive moment of action (the local centre of spirituality would doubtless call it kairos.) Archbishop Nichols told the clergy of Westminster on the 9th of June last, that "the Liturgy forms us, not us the Liturgy." I agree with him and would add that right now, we need to seize the opportunity to change more than simply the translation: clergy of orthodox faith who love the Church must take the risk of insisting that they will submit themselves to the Liturgy, eradicate informality, correct abuses and (if not literally then at least symbolically) turn towards the Lord. Whether in English or in Latin, we are in fact going up to the altar of God. And He is the one who gives joy to our youth.

Dear Bishop

2011-11-14T16:58:00.001-05:00

Dear Bishop,

Is all this really necessary?

"Here we are being instructed by our bishop to remain standing when we return to our pew and remain standing until all have received. I know that the Mass is not a private devotion and a common posture is good, but I am wondering, can this be interpreted in the same way as the direction for receiving communion? While that direction is to stand and receive on the hand, we all have a right to receive on the tongue while kneeling. But then again, just because we have a right doesn't necessarily mean we should exercise that right. I do not know what I am going to do!" ...SW

"I myself will be kneeling after receiving, upon arrival at the pew. We have also heard we are to stand until all receive, but I will be following Cardinal Arinze on this one." ...CapeBretoner

I cannot tell you to disobey, but then, I doubt that the bishop has the authority to regulate you like this, regardless.. The Church is not some kind of communist boot camp. Go and receive Him, kneel if you choose, receive Him on your tongue and go back to your pew and quietly kneel in a corner at the back and ignore anyone who harasses you. I'm with Cardinal Arinze and Cape Bretoner on this one! --Vox.

"Why is it so important that everyone do the same thing? Myself, it means much to me to kneel after the Agnus Dei. And I don't want to stand around after receiving communion, waiting for everyone to receive. The story I get is that "standing is the way our culture shows respect" and "kneeling was for slaves back then". Our Bishop is wonderful. He is all for the new ways. I dare to disagree though and am starting to dread going to Mass because I am afraid...Thank you for getting all this info out to people. Maybe tolerance will prevail. I am not sure what I will do if someone complains about my kneeling. I've all ready let folks know where I stand (hah hah) on the "new postures". I hate disagreements but even more so I had being pushed around. I think it is beneath the dignity of the clergy to try to force people, especially older Catholics, to give up reverent liturgical practices that are dear to them."...Maria K.

Never "dread" going to Mass. On the other hand, if it is really that bad and a disturbance to your soul, then try to find a different parish. A priest friend once told me a story about his late well-known sister (a writer of some high regard in these matters who wrote the book to wake up Canadian about the liturgy and the crisis). It seems that she was praying once before the Blessed Sacrament and as she poured her heart out to Jesus with how much she was suffering because of the liturgical abuses, she heard and audible voice, "If I have to put up with it, so do you!" Blessed John Paul II quoted the Archangel Gabriel upon his elevation, "Do not be afraid." I would add "be strong" and calm and seek out a different parish if necessary. The "regulation" after communion is simply illogical and wrong. If you choose to kneel, then kneel. The bishop has no authority in this matter at that place. The GIRM does not give him the power to "regulate" at that point. It is silent on the matter. It is your choice and right to kneel.--Vox.

And may Toronto always be grateful for "laudable practice!"

Me too.

2011-11-14T16:56:00.001-05:00

I know too as I was also there. But being five years older than Voris, I remember the plywood table set up one Sunday and a rather forlorn and sober looking Father Carroll being so out of place. Then at 13, I left. What Michael says in this video is true. It happened here in Toronto just like that. It happened everywhere...

The GIRM and the Calgarian Catholic Church

2011-11-09T18:06:00.001-05:00

Bishop Fred Henry of Calgary has recently announced certain norms for the implemntation of the General Instruction on the Roman Missal, the GIRM.

I have no doubt that Bishop Henry means well, he must be terribly decieved by those around him who have adivsed him in this matter.

Those who have advised the bishop and published this under his name have also taken a public stand against the well-known practice of Pope Benedict XVI and what had become known as the "Benectine Arrangement" which has been recently implemented in Toronto's St. Michael's Cathedral with beautiful new medieval style candlesticks. It is simply unacceptable that professional Catholics and chancery officials would mislead a bishop to publish something that simply contradicts not only the GIRM but Redemptionis Sacramentum. He is clearly not being well-served. These are the same bureaucrats who advised the bishop to ban communion on the tongue and to suspend the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter. The bishop is not being well-served.

Here is the link to the PDF document at the Dicocese of Calgary.

Implementation Directives FOR THE DIOCESE OF CALGARY

ACCORDING TO THE GENERAL INSTRUCTION OF THE ROMAN MISSAL, 2011

The purpose of this document is to call attention to certain paragraphs in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) 2011 that require a change of practice for some if not all of our parishes. It also presents the decisions that I have made as Bishop of the Diocese of Calgary on certain aspects of the same.

The General Instruction of Roman Missal speaks of the Bishop's role in paragraph #22.
One cannot act outside the actual GIRM.

PREPARATION BEFORE THE LITURGY REGARDING CROSS AND CANDLES

GIRM #117 The altar is to be covered with at least one white cloth. In addition, on or next to the altar are to be placed candlesticks with lighted candles: at least two in any celebration ... Likewise, on the altar or close to it, there is to be a cross adorned with a figure of Christ crucified. The candles and the cross with the figure of Christ crucified may also be carried in the procession at the Entrance. On the altar itself may be placed a Book of the Gospels distinct from the book of other readings, unless it [the Book of the Gospels] is carried in the

Entrance Procession.

DIRECTIVE The general practice in the Diocese of Calgary is to place the cross and candles next to the altar rather than on the altar. If placed on the altar, the cross and candles should be positioned so as to avoid creating a barrier between the priest and the people.

Those of you who have read The Spirit of the Liturgy will know that then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger wrote about what has become known as the "Benedictine Arrangement" of six candles across the front of the Altar with the Crucified Christ in the middle. He is re-focussing our attention and the Priest Celebrant's. The GIRM does not specify this, yet, but wait for the Fourth Edition of the Roman Missal. This is a re-orientation of our focus away from the personality of the priest and in turn, his distraction by the people to Christ. What must follow is legislated return to "ad orientem" posture.
The practice of placing the processional candles at the ambo may continue. For those who follow the practice of lighting the candles at the altar during the offertory, this may also continue.

This is a liturgical error. The Processional Candles are to be only at the Ambo during the reading of the Gospel as they represent the presence of Christ. When it is not that time, Christ is not present at the Ambo. The candles are not "lit" at this time, whatever that is, it is a silly and trite innovation. The Processional Candles should be placed near the Credence Table or some other are of the sanctuary.
INTRODUCTORY RITES

Entrance Procession with the Book of the Gospels

The following paragraphs from the General Instruction of the Roman Missal make reference to the Book of the Gospels: #117, #120, #122, #173, #194, #195.

DIRECTIVE 1. When the reader carries the Book of the Gospels a simple bow of the head is sufficient.

2. According to the General Instruction of the Roman Missal the lectionary should not be carried in the entrance procession, but rather the Book of the Gospels. Currently Canada does not have a Book of the Gospels. Processing even with the lectionary has created a deep respect for the scripture, the Word of God, and has increased the awareness of the Word as a mode of Christ's presence among us. We will continue to use the lectionary in procession until the Book of the Gospels is available. At that time the lectionary will no longer be carried in procession, only the Book of the Gospels. #90 makes no mention of the Book of the Gospels being carried in the closing procession. Therefore the Book of the Gospels (or lectionary) will be left in place at the end of the liturgy.
It appears that in Calgary the bereaucrats have poorly advised the bishop. The "Lectionary" is not be held aloft in procession, only the Book of Gospels.
LITURGY OF THE EUCHARIST

Presentation of the Gifts

From Redemptionis Sacramentum #106 However, the pouring of the Blood of Christ after the consecration

from one vessel to another is completely to be avoided, lest anything should happen that would be to the detriment of so great a mystery.

DIRECTIVE Wine may be presented to the priest in a flagon, but then it must be poured into the chalices prior to the Consecration. This is best done while the chalice is being prepared.

A little picking and choosing what to obey.
Posture - General Article on Posture

#43 The faithful should stand from the beginning of the Entrance chant, or while the Priest approaches the altar, until the end of the Collect; for the Alleluia chant before the Gospel; while the Gospel itself is proclaimed; during the Profession of Faith and the Universal Prayer; and from the invitation, Orate, fratres (Pray, brethren), before the Prayer over the Offerings until the end of Mass, except at the places indicated here below. The faithful should sit, on the other hand, during the readings before the Gospel and the Responsorial Psalm and for the Homily and during the Preparation of the Gifts at the Offertory; and, if appropriate, during the period of sacred silence after Communion.

In the dioceses of Canada, the faithful should kneel at the Consecration, except when prevented on occasion by ill health, or for reasons of lack of space, of the large number of people present, or for another reasonable cause. However, those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the Priest genuflects after the Consecration. Where it is the practice for the people to remain kneeling after the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) until the end of the Eucharistic Prayer and before Communion when the Priest says Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God), it is laudable for this practice to be retained.

Posture During the Preparation Rite

Specific to this moment in the liturgy, paragraph #43 states: The faithful should sit, on the other hand, during the readings before the Gospel and the Responsorial Psalm and for the Homily and during the Preparation of the Gifts at the Offertory; and, if appropriate, during the period of sacred silence after Communion.

DIRECTIVE To establish this posture as a common practice throughout the Diocese, a change is required. The people will sit through the Preparation Rite, rising in time to respond to the invitation Pray my sisters and brothers. The ritual gesture of standing is a treasured posture in the Church's prayer and is the desired posture when we offer prayer to God. At this point in the Preparation Rite we stand in readiness to offer our prayer through the voice of the priest as he prays the presidential prayer over the gifts.
This is a change to take place everywhere.

Posture During the Eucharistic Prayer

DIRECTIVE Although it has been the practice in this Diocese to stand during the Eucharistic Prayer and before Communion when the priest says This is the Lamb of God, the posture to be assumed by the faithful for the Consecration is kneeling. Therefore, in all the churches in the Diocese of Calgary the faithful are to kneel at the conclusion of the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) and to stand when the priest announces The Mystery of Faith. Those who may not be able to kneel for such reasons as infirmity are invited to make a profound bow when the celebrant genuflects at the Consecration of the bread and again at the Consecration of the wine. For your information, this same directive will be given by the other Latin Rite Bishops of Alberta and the Northwest Territories to their faithful. This directive applies only to churches and exceptions would be chapels in institutions, halls, outdoor mass sites, gymnasiums, etc. Churches in our diocese that do not currently have kneelers have until the first Sunday in Advent 2012 to submit to the Bishop’s Office a plan for how they will modify their facilities to comply with the Diocesan application ofthe norm in the GIRM.

Sadly in Calgary, there is no "laudable practice." But where did the kneelers go?

Posture for the Deacon During the Eucharistic Prayer

#179 During the Eucharistic Prayer, the Deacon stands near the Priest, but slightly behind him, so that when necessary he may assist the Priest with the chalice or the Missal. From the epiclesis until the Priest shows the chalice, the Deacon usually remains kneeling.
DIRECTIVE Generally the deacon will kneel as required, unless he is not able because of health or lack of space. In this circumstance the rule as found in #43 is applied: Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the Priest genuflects after the Consecration.

Health factors and inability to kneel goes without saying. Obviously this is being addressed because the current GIRM specifying this is being ignored.

The Rite of Peace

#154 Priest may give the sign of Peace to the ministers but always remains within the sanctuary, so that the celebration is not disrupted. He may do the same if, for a reasonable cause, he wishes to offer the sign of Peace to a small number of the faithful.

When May Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion Come to the Altar?

#162 In the distribution of Communion the Priest may be assisted by other Priests who happen to be present. If such Priests are not present and there is a truly large number of communicants, the Priest may call upon extraordinary ministers to assist him, that is, duly instituted acolytes or even other faithful who have been duly deputed for this purpose. In case of necessity, the priest may depute suitable faithful for this single occasion. These ministers should not approach the altar before the Priest has received Communion, and then they are always to receive from the hands of the Priest Celebrant the vessel containing the species of the most Holy Eucharist for distribution to the faithful.

DIRECTIVE In the Diocese of Calgary, the extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion may enter the sanctuary at the Sign of Peace, and stand away from the altar. After the priest consumes the Eucharistic Species, the extraordinary ministers approach the altar. They may receive Communion from the Priest, the deacon, or one of the other extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion who has been the first of the laity to receive Communion. However, the Priest must present the Communion vessels to the extraordinary ministers.

This is clearly not permitted. The GIRM is clear on when the Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion are to enter the sanctuary. I am very impressed by the good pastor at the parish in Toronto where I am Cantor on Saturday evening. Upon reading this in the new GIRM, he immediately corrected it!

Posture During the Communion Rite

#43 Where it is the practice for the people to remain kneeling after the Sanctus (Holy, Holy, Holy) until the end of the Eucharistic Prayer and before Communion when the Priest says Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God), itis laudable for this practice to be retained.

DIRECTIVE In the Diocese of Calgary we will continue the practice of standing during the acclamation This is the Lamb of God.
Sadly, there is no "laudable practice" to maintain.

The Communion Song
Um, I think the GIRM refers to the Communion "Chant"

#86 While the Priest is receiving the Sacrament, the Communion Chant is begun, its purpose being to express the spiritual union of the communicants bymeans of the unity of their voices, to show gladness of heart, and to bring out more clearly the "communitarian"character of the procession to receive the Eucharist. The singing is prolonged for as long as the Sacrament is being administered to the faithful.

DIRECTIVE The common posture of standing continues during the Communion procession and singing of the Communion song. This practice teaches us that Communion is a corporate action in which we together are drawn into the Eucharistic mystery and the life of the Trinity. Singing together helps us realize our communion together in the Risen Lord. We will catechize on the importance of communal song during the

Communion Procession. The bond of unity is expressed by joining in the congregational song before receiving Communion and after consuming the sacred elements. Personal prayer takes place during the silence after the Communion procession is finished. At that time while the priest or other designated extraordinary ministers are purifying the vessels, we should also enter into communal silence together.

WHY ARE YOU TREATING PEOPLE LIKE AN ARMY..."Francis Cardinal Arinze"

Posture for Receiving Communion

#160 The Priest then takes the paten or ciborium and approaches the communicants, who usually come up in procession. It is not permitted for the faithful to take the consecrated Bread or the sacred chalice by themselves and, still less, to hand them on from one to another among themselves. In the Dioceses of Canada, Holy Communion is to be received standing, though individual members of the faithful may choose to receive Communion while kneeling. When standing before the minister to receive Holy Communion, the faithful should make a simple bow of the head. When receiving Holy Communion on the tongue, they reverently join their hands; when receiving Holy Communion in the hand, they reverently open their hands placing one beneath the other, and they consume the host immediately upon receiving it.

DIRECTIVE The more common posture is for the people to stand to receive Communion, but we need to be aware that kneeling is permitted. A prie-dieu should not be provided for this latter posture. It is important to convey to the people that paragraph #160 is not an indication that one posture is more holy than the other.

OH, GIVE US A BREAK! BECAUSE PEOPLE WHO CHOOSE TO KNEEL ARE ARROGANT AND PRIDEFUL AND THINK THAT THEY ARE ALREADY SAINTS.
formation is also needed on:

a) How to receive on the tongue: tilt the head back and extend the tongue in order that the hand of the minister does not contact the mouth of the communicant.

b) How to receive in the hand: place one hand beneath the other, then take the lower hand and lift the host to one's mouth. NO, ONE SHOULD BRING THEIR HAND TO THEIR MOUTHS OR BETTER STILL, STICK OUT YOUR TONGUE AND PUT AN END TO THIS ABOMINATION!

c) No sign of the cross or genuflection is required after receiving Communion.

New Required Sign of Reverence at Communion

#160 When standing before the minister to receive Holy Communion, the faithful should make a simple bow of the head.

DIRECTIVE The bow of the head is a sign of reverence for the sacred presence of the Risen Lord in the Communion elements. This is a bow of the head and not a deep bow.In order that it be a gesture of integrity and not rote motion the whole Communion procession will need to take on a slightly slower pace.Each communicant will make the bow of the head while standing before the sacred elements, not while the person ahead is receiving Communion. The bow will occur in a timely manner while the previous communicant is

moving away. The minister will wait for the communicant to make the bow, then raise his or her face toward the minister in order to respond appropriately. Once the communicant raises the head, the minister holds the

host and proclaims The Body of Christ. The communicant responds Amen. The consecrated host is placed with care upon the hand of the communicant, or on the tongue. The communicant then moves to the station to receive the Blood of Christ in the same manner. In the Diocese of Calgary the bow is encouraged before both elements: the Body of Christ and the Blood of Christ.

Communion from the Elements Consecrated at the Same Mass

#85 It is most desirable that the faithful, just as the Priest himself is bound to do, receive the Lord's Body from hosts consecrated at the same Mass and that, in the cases where this is foreseen, they partake of the chalice (cf. #283), so that even by means of the signs Communion may stand out more clearly as a participation in the sacrifice actually being celebrated.

DIRECTIVE Recognizing the practical challenges of #85, we should strongly encourage the participation of the faithful in the fullness of the paschal sacrifice by receiving elements consecrated at that same liturgy.
Communion from the Chalice

#245 The Blood of the Lord may be consumed either by drinking from the chalice directly, or by intinction, or by means of a tube or a spoon.

DIRECTIVE In the Diocese of Calgary, the Blood of the Lord may be consumed only by
drinking from the chalice.
Yuck.
Who May Place Remaining Consecrated Hosts in the Tabernacle?

#163 When the distribution of Communion is over, the Priest himself immediately and completely consumes at the altar any consecrated wine that happens to remain; as for any consecrated hosts that are left, he either consumes them at the altar or carries them to the place designated for the reservation of the Eucharist.

DIRECTIVE #63 states that only the deacon or priest may go to the tabernacle. This applies also to retrieving previously consecrated hosts from the tabernacle. In the Diocese of Calgary, formally installed extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion may also go to the tabernacle. From a practical viewpoint it is fitting therefore to have sufficient hosts consecrated at the liturgy to provide for the entire assembly in so far as this is possible.
Who May Purify the vessels?

#163 Upon returning to the altar, the Priest collects the fragments, should any remain, and he stands at the altar or at the credence table and purifies the paten or ciborium over the chalice, and after this purifies the chalice, saying quietly the formula Quod ore sumpsimus, Domine (What has passed our lips), and dries the chalice with a purificator. If the vessels are purified at the altar, they are carried to the credence table by a minister.Nevertheless, it is also permitted to leave vessels needing to be purified, especially if there are several, on a corporal, suitably covered, either on the altar or on the credence table, and to purify them immediately after Mass, after the Dismissal of the people.

#192 Likewise, after the distribution of Communion is complete, a duly instituted acolyte helps the Priest or Deacon to purify and arrange the sacred vessels. In the absence of a Deacon, a duly instituted acolyte carries the sacred vessels to the credence table and there purifies them, wipes them and arranges them as usual.

DIRECTIVE In the Diocese of Calgary, a priest, deacon, instituted acolyte, or formally installed extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may purify the vessels. The principle here is that if you can do the greater, then you can do the lesser.

EXTRAORDINARY MINISTERS OF HOLY COMMUNION OR NOT PERMITTED TO PURIFY THE VESSELS! THERE WAS AN INDULT FOR THIS ONLY IN THE DIOCESES OF THE UNITED STATES. THEREFORE, IF IT WAS OR IS HAPPENING IN CANADA IT IS ILLEGAL IN 2008 THE INDULT EXPIRED AND WAS NOT RENEWED FOR THE UNITED STATES. IT DID NOT THEN NOR NOW APPLY TO CANADA AND BISHOP HENRY OF CALGARY IS IN DIRECT DISSENT TO THE GENERAL INSTRUCTION ON THIS AND REDEMPTIONIS SACRAMENTUM.
The purification may be done after the Communion procession at the credence table but not in the sacristry.

It may also occur immediately after the liturgy, however the purification of the vessels should not delay the priest from greeting the people.
CONCLUDING RITES

#166 When the Prayer after Communion is concluded, brief announcements should be made to the people, if there are any. #168, 185 Immediately after the Blessing ... Ite missa est (Go forth the Mass is ended).

And all reply Thanks be to God.

DIRECTIVE Only dismissals contained in the Missal are to be used.
AT LEAST THIS IS CORRECT. IT IS THE POSTCOMMUNION PRAYER, NOT THE PRE-DISMISSAL PRAYER. ANNOUNCMENTS COME AFTERWARDS!

I said previously, it will take more than a correct translation.

All Saints Missa Solemnis - Toronto

2011-10-31T08:08:00.000-04:00

Una Voce Toronto is pleased to be sponsoring a Missa Solemnis for the Feast of All Saints on Tuesday, November 1, 2011 at 7:30 P.M. at St. Leo's Mimico. Located at 277 Royal York Road in Etobicoke.

The Sacred Ministers include Father Paul Nicholson, Priest, Father Kim D'Souza, Deacon and Father Russell Asch, Subdeacon. This the fifth time that Father D'Souza has been Deacon in a Solemn Mass, the fourth since being ordained to the priesthood in 2010. Father Asch was ordained to the priesthood for the Archdiocese of Toronto in May 2011. Father Nicholson celebrates both the Ordinary and Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite as his parish, St. Patrick's Kinkora in the Diocese of London. The Pastor of St. Leo's, Father Frank Carpinelli, will provide the homily.

Thw music will be provided by the new Una Voce Toronto Schola and Choir and includes the Gregorian Propers including the extended Offertory and the extended Psalm verses for the Communion. The Ordinary is the Mass for Three Voices by William Bryd with motets by Palestrina, Viadana and Dering.

We hope to see you at this most sacred feast.

Fighting Back With Truth and Clarity

2011-10-18T08:50:00.000-04:00

How amazing is the internet for our ability to communicate and cooperate and spread the truth. No wonder they have closed the CCCB Plenary to everyone but Pepper & Darknessa. What is it that they are afraid of?

Have they not yet figured it out that they cannot stop people from communicating or spreading the truth?

Didn't they want an educated laity. Is there arrogance not the height of the clericalism that they profess to detest?
In a post below, I point out two letters about regimented standing orders in conjunction with the new GIRM. This is occurring in two separate dioceses 2,000kms apart. Antigonish and Sault Ste. Marie. There is a common denominator though, the current Bishop of Antigonish is the former Bishop of Sault Ste. Marie.

Before you go any further, take a few moments and watch this video of the former Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Francis Cardinal Arinze. Watch all of it, but particularly the points referred to about standing whilst everyone is receiving communion in a regimented fashios is addresesd at 3:00

Now, back to the Internet and communications.

Gaby, a regular reader left a note in the combox of We've Got Mail. In it, she left a dubium, a doubt or question, asked by none other than the Archbishop of Chicago, Cardinal George and it is posted at Adoremus. The dubium was answered in what is a called a Responsum by Cardinal Arinze on this very topic.

Here is the main point:

At the time Cardinal Francis George, of Chicago, was Chairman of the Bishops' Committee of the Liturgy, and the question was raised due to this habit by liturgists developing in the United States forcing the people into this regimented posture. The new GIRM was issued and the Cardinal asks if the "long-standing practices of individuals kneeling upon returning to their places after having received Holy Communion is somehow prohbitited. It was noted that there is "controversy ... over the proper posture of the faithful at Mass after receiving Holy Communion. In several dioceses people have been instructed that they must stand until the last person has received Communion, despite the long-standing custom that people knelt during the distribution of Communion"

Dubium: In many places, the faithful are accustomed to kneeling or sitting in personal prayer upon returning to their places after having individually received Holy Communion during Mass. Is it the intention of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, to forbid this practice?

Cardinal Francis Arinze, Prefect of the CDW, responded to the question on June 5, 2003 (Prot. N. 855/03/L):

Responsum: Negative, et ad mensum [No, for this reason]. The mens [reasoning] is that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on the one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.

Isn't the Internet wonderful?

We've got mail...

2011-10-17T19:06:00.000-04:00

How is it that people are so distressed by what is being caused in their parishes that to get an answer they need to write to a blogger.

Truly, I am humbled. More, I am saddened.

Letter 1 from Antigonish:

Sent: Monday, October 10, 2011 3:04:30 PM
To: voxcantoris@rogers.com
Subject: New Missal & Unity of Posture

Good Afternoon,

I have been following your blog for a while now, particularly you posts on the new missal which are very informative. Thank you!

I am in the Diocese of Antigonish and this weekend one of the local bulletins had an insert on the new missal and unity of posture. One of the changes stated was:

In our diocese, the people will continue standing, even at their pew, until the last person in the communion procession receives communion. The hymn will not end until the last person receives, then the people may kneel. (The full bulletin can be viewed here:

http://www.cansoparishes.org/bulletin.html

I find it hard to believe that this is an actual change but I am no expert! Do you know anything about this?

Thank you for your time.

Letter 2 from another forlorn place in Canada, the Diocese of Sault Ste. Marie

Sent: October 17, 2011 4:42 PM
To: voxcantoris@rogers.com
Subject: communion

Hello,

Can you help me? My mom called me this afternoon. She was told that the GIRM 2011 indicated that the congregation must remain STANDING after communion until everyone has received? I am surprised. I've been to a CMAA conference, read quite a bit, perused the new GIRM for Canada, but have never heard this. I hope it's not true! Do you know of any such instruction?

Thank you.

Dear my fellow suffering Canadian Catholics,

The GIRM indicates two things. We must kneel at the Consecration, so all those churches that pulled out their kneelers will have to put them back in. Second, those places where kneeling is from the end of the Sanctus to the Doxology and from the Agnus Dei, that is a “laudable” practice to be maintained. Once you return to the pew from Communion the decision on whether to kneel, sit or stand is yours and yours alone. The GIRM is silent here thought there is reference that the priest and faithful “may pray quietly for a time.

Nobody has the right to tell you what your posture is at this point. The decision is yours. If anyone harasses you for kneeling or orders you up on your knees then that is an action straight out of Hell.

Perhaps you might have you expert liturgists consider what Cardinal Arinze has to say.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cc0g3UMRtMM

The good news?

In 20 years, the people that are doing this will all be retired or dead and before the judgement seat of God.

The other good news?

The “FOURTH TYPICAL EDITION” will be upon us before you know it, after all, its rubrics next and praxis, not translation; and the sound which you hear is the death knell of the cabal of modernists, feminists, homosexualits, socialists and fascists dressed up as catholics with a small "c" as they try to persecute you one more time.

Be strong friend, Jesus has already won it for us.
God bless.

Vox Cantoris

The Gloria you should all be singing!

2011-10-12T08:06:00.001-04:00

If you have not yet discovered the really fine work done by Jeff Ostrowski and the other good folks at the Corpus Christi Watershed, then I urge you to do so. Their work along with that of Jeffrey Tucker and Adam Bartlett at The Chant Cafe and Church Music Association of America is critically important right now. The change to the Third Typical Edition of the Roman Missal is a great opportunity but if the beauty is to be realised fully, then you are going to have to spread this news in your parish to affect real change.

Here is the setting of the Roman Missal Gloria based on Mass XV, Missa Dominator Deus which dates from at least the 9th century. It is presented here with an organ accompaniement. This Gloria was deemed by Father Bill Burke of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops to be "too hard" for Canadians and has been scandalously left out of the so-called "Chant Setting" in the Canadian hymnal supplement.

Father Burke, with all due respect, I have more confidence in my fellow Catholic Canadians than you do.

I have used this Gloria for the past two weeks at the Vigil Mass on Saturdays and it will take some time but I fully expect the congregation will learn this and come to appreciate its prayerfullness and ethereal beauty.

The Proper thing to do!

2011-10-06T03:11:00.002-04:00

A very important talk at a very important symposium hosted by the Most Reverend Thomas Olmstead, Bishoip of Phoenix and a leader of the Church to be watched for greater things through the grace of God.

Until the approval of The New Roman Missal by Pope Paul VI on 3 April 1969, there had existed for four hundred years a substantial unity between the texts of the Proper of the Mass contained in the Graduale Romanum and those given in the Roman Missal. The Missal, in effect, reproduced the complete texts of those sung parts of the Mass that in the Graduale Romanum are fully notated.

Read the rest here.

Considering the GIRM II: Posture for Holy Communion

2011-09-28T21:22:00.001-04:00

Some may think that standing for Holy Communion began with the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Missae in 1970. For those of us over 50, the Novus Ordo is the "New, New Mass." We had the "New Mass" -the 1965 Roman Missal and it was then that standing began, though Holy Communion was still on the tongue and patens were still used. It was considered a vile abuse in Holland and Belgium where experimentation gave way to the almost universal dissent of commuion-in-the-hand prompting Pope Paul VI to issue Memoriale Domini which was promptly ignored and which he was too weak to enforce.
It was not long after this, and certainly even before 1970, that Communion Rails - the last remaining part of the Rood in the West, which in the Byzantine is the Iconostasis and in the Syriac the Veil, were by and large, removed and some rather sadly and unceremoniously ending up as parking curbs.

Truly, the Byzantine and Syriac manner of receiving the Eucharist is standing. In fact, they don't kneel at all in the Divine Liturgy or Qurbono as it is known in the Syriac Church. It was in the west that kneeling became the norm as a response to heresy and doubt in the Real Presence - not so much a problem in either Eastern Churches. Along with this destruction of Communion Rails of course came the Magdalene moment of searching for the Tabernacle. It was a debate between the "dynamic" verses the "static" presence. We simple Catholics knew nothing of dynamic or static, only Real.

This debate still rages, though it is changing for the better as the generation that did all this dies off. They left few children literally or spiritually and in a decade's time they will be all be gone to their particular judgement or resting in nursing homes. It will be up to us to ensure that they are not euthanised even though they did not fight the early fight against the slaughter of the innocents as they were too busy with coke and pizza Masses. The churches will be emptier but they will be filled with Catholics who will strive for something better and they will be filled with fewer but holier and zealous young priests that are not masculine and not emasculated.

The facts are that no order from the Second Vatican Council ever provided for Communion Rails to be ripped out or Tabernacles to be displaced. This came later by "expert liturgists." Official documents referred to new constructioin and in fact, architectural or artistic significance was to be retained.

However, keeping these rails or barriers, as these experts would claim would have prevented the universal adoption of standing for Holy Communion and create a barrier to the Table. Despite this, individual Catholics chose to reject this posture and in its wisdom, Holy Mother Church issued a document called Redemptions Sacramentum in which, the Communicants right to not only receive communion kneeling was enshrined but the restating that Communion-on-the-tongue is the norm and always remains the universal law of the Church, notwithstanding what individula Ordinaries did in my town during SARS or H1N1. They were wrong, I said it then and I repeat it now, both of them.

So, what does the GIRM for Canada and other countries say?

160. The Priest then takes the paten or ciborium and approaches the communicants, who usually come up in procession.

It is not permitted for the faithful to take the consecrated Bread or the sacred chalice by themselves and, still less, to hand them on from one to another among themselves. In the Dioceses of Canada, Holy Communion is to be received standing, though individual members of the faithful may choose to receive Communion while kneeling. When standing before the minister to receive Holy Communion, the faithful should make a simple bow of the head. When receiving Holy Communion on the tongue, they reverently join their hands; when receiving Holy Communion in the hand, they reverently open their hands placing one beneath the other, and they consume the host immediately upon receiving it.

Did you read that?

In Canada, the norm is standing as we know, but "individual members of the faithful may choose to receive Communion while kneeling!"

A few other points in the paragraph above. "It is not permitted for the faithful to take the consecrated Bread or the sacred chalice by themselves and, still less, to hand them on from one to another among themselves." If you do this, stop. If you see it being done, file a complaint and refer to the paragraph in the GIRM.

Note this too: "When standing before the minister to receive Holy Communion, the faithful should make a simple bow of the head."

And this: "When receiving Holy Communion on the tongue, they reverently join their hands; when receiving Holy Communion in the hand, they reverently open their hands placing one beneath the other, and they consume the host immediately upon receiving it." This is so the Priest, or Deacon or EMHC if absolutely necessary knows how to approach you with the Host. But also be aware, you are to place one hand beneath the other (as a throne) and you "consume the host immediately upon receiving it" you do not walk away and pop Him in your mouth as if He is a nacho chip. You bring your hands to your mouth!

Of course, you should simply receive on the tongue and then all the EMHC would go away because they find it repulsive.

So, in the matter of kneeling for Holy Communion; unless the church has a communion rail which they promote and utilise and you are in the McDonald's line, then let common sense and charity prevail. If you choose to avail yourself of your right granted to you by Holy Mother Church do so at the end of the line anbe d humble about it.

But know this!

The priest cannot refuse you and the bishop cannot drag you to your feet nor can he have you arrested.

Now, you don't have to pay attention to me, but you might want to watch what the man who some day could be the first Pope from America has to say...or then again, it might be a bishop from Kazakhstan who has called for a new Syllabus of Errors.

Friends, every Catholic needs to read and study the GIRM.

Spread the Good News!

Considering the GIRM I: The Kyrie

2011-09-28T20:24:00.001-04:00

In the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite the Kyrie is considered to be "nine-fold" that is three times Kyrie eleison, three times Christe eleison and three times Kyrie eleison. There are two times in the Roman Rite, Extraordinary and Ordinary that the people can proclaim in Greek, the other is on Good Friday with the Trisagion, Holy God, Holy Mighty One, Holy Immortal One, Hagios O Theos, Hagios Ischyros, Hagios Athanatos. This dear readers, is in Greek and is in the Graduale Romanum 1974 for the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite.

But, back to our Kyrie and the nine-fold.

The fabricators (a descriptive used in the Spirit of the Liturgy by Pope Benedict XVI) of the Novus Ordo Missae cut this to a simple response "six-fold." In doing so, they eliminated the awesome mystery of this penitential beseeching in its Trinitarian formula of three for the Three Persons of the Most Holy Trinity and the symbolism of the chanting of the Nine Choirs of Angels.

Consistently then, the result has been that "Gregorian" Kyries were modified as six-fold. But this was not always necessary. In fact, some of them cannot be done in six-fold as they were musically composed as nine-fold, they were not simple repetitions, for example the Kyrie from Missa Cum Jubilo, Mass IX. The former GIRM permitted this. In fact, the previously referred to Graduale Romanum for the Novus Ordo published in 1974 included this Kyrie. If it was not meant to be sung nine-fold, why as it included? For your information, the signatory in the GM was Archbishop Annibale Bugnini, the lead "fabricator!"

Let us look at what the new GIRM approved for use in Canada and elsewhere states with the point to which I wish to draw your attention in bold:

The Kyrie Eleison

52. After the Penitential Act, the Kyrie, eleison (Lord, have mercy), is always begun, unless it has already been part of the Penitential Act. Since it is a chant by which the faithful acclaim the Lord and implore his mercy, it is usually executed by everyone, that is to say, with the people and the choir or cantor taking part in it.

Each acclamation is usually pronounced twice, though it is not to be excluded that it be repeated several times, by reason of the character of the various languages, as well as of the artistry of the music or of other circumstances. When the Kyrie is sung as a part of the Penitential Act, a “trope” precedes each acclamation.

Now, let us be clear. In a Read Mass, the six-fold Kyrie is the Law of the Church and the GIRM is liturgical law. But if the Kyrie is sung in Greek or in English (as there were some fine ones composed for 1965), these can be freely done.

Here then, is the Kyrie from Missa Cum Jubilo, Gregorian Mass IX.

The opposite of laudable.

2011-09-28T19:21:00.001-04:00

A priest friend working in the Vatican has written to me a few times on the matter of kneeling during the Canon of the Mass. In Rome at least, even at St. Peter's Basilica, kneeling is only at the Consecration. This is consistent with the 1975 GIRM. In Poland which he recently visited and opined that "Poland will save the Church yet" they kneel from the end of the Sanctus to the end of the Memorial Acclamation, a practice that was asked for by the Canadian bishops but not approved by Rome.

Some have suggested that this whole thread or topic is boring.

Meanwhile, a reader in beautiful Newfoundland writes:

I just finished attending an Archdiocesan meeting on the new GIRM and the Archbishop has stated in no uncertain terms that even in parishes where they had the "laudable" practice of kneeling from from the Sanctus to Communion it will not be allowed. There will only be kneeling at the Consecration.

If the GIRM says this:

In the dioceses of Canada, the faithful should kneel at the Consecration, except when prevented on occasion by ill health, or for reasons of lack of space, of the large number of people present, or for another reasonable cause.53 However, those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the Priest genuflects after the Consecration. Where it is the practice for the people to remain kneeling after the Sanctus (Holy, Holy,Holy) until the end of the Eucharistic Prayer and before Communion when the Priest says Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God), it is laudable for this practice to be retained.

...then what does it mean if the practice is not "allowed?'

Is this important?

Is the corrected translation enough?

Will they ensure "sacred silence" with the same vigour?

Will the Archbishop of St. John's ensure that only "priests, deacons and instituted acolytes" preform the ritual ablutions...you know...doing the dishes?

And then there is this:

41. The main place should be given, all things being equal, to Gregorian chant, as being proper to the Roman Liturgy. Other kinds of sacred music, in particular polyphony, are in no way excluded, provided that they correspond to the spirit of the liturgical action and that they foster the participation of all the faithful.

Since the faithful from different countries come together ever more frequently, it is desirable that they know how to sing together at least some parts of the Ordinary of the Mass in Latin, especially the Profession of Faith and the Lord’s Prayer, according to the simpler settings.

Discuss.

How we Communicate

2011-09-28T18:39:00.002-04:00

If you' ve not visited Rorate Caeli blog to read this post by New Catholic, then please do and read the comment box.

Send it to your Catholic friends and especially to priests.

Here is a sample:

Translation problems? Mass celebrated towards the people? Altar girls? Postures?

No, the greatest and gravest problem of the liturgy of the Latin Church - that is, of the "Ordinary form", or Mass of Paul VI - is one that transcends all this, even it is related to all of them: it is the way the Body of Christ is treated. That must be the very first issued tackled by an eventual true "reform of the reform", one that is set not by fleeting example, but by hard law.

If you receive Holy Communion in the hand, stop and stop it now!

It was wrong for Paul VI to allow this abomination. He should have outlawed what was a vile abuse and now you are participating in it.

Stop it now!

Not one penny!

2011-09-25T06:39:00.001-04:00

With a "hat tip" to Mike for finding the post below -- More Idiocy from a Canadian Bishop -- on a reader or something, I have reposted it below. I had deleted it without intending to do so when cleaning up a few drafts.

The good Father in New Brunswick does not deserve this treatment at the hands of the Bishop of Bathurst.

...and speaking of bishops.

Today, at your church, there will be a second collection for the "Bishops of Canada." This collection goes to your diocese to offset the "tax" which the diocese (you) pays to the CCCB. If there is a shortage the diocese pays the total anyway.

So, why should we pay anything for the CCCB? They have set up another "hierarchy" between the Ordinary and the Pope and we have seen the results. No, not one penny for the CCCB and their Development and Peace or their not "too hard" Gloria.

Not one penny.

More idiocy from a Canadian Bishop!

by Vox Cantoris

For once, I am speechless.

BATHURST, New Brunswick, September 22, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The Catholic Diocese of Bathurst, New Brunswick has removed an elderly priest from active ministry after he caused a storm of controversy by denouncing homosexuality, cohabitation, and abortion in an August homily.

85-year-old Fr. Donat Gionet had retired to his home town of Caraquet in June to serve palliative care patients, and now laments that in his declining years he is being forced to celebrate Mass “in secret.”

Fr. Wesley Wade, the diocese’s vicar general, told Radio-Canada that Fr. Gionet’s comments were consistent with Church teaching, but lacked the proper “pastoral” sensitivity.

Read it all, here.

Here is the bishop's contact information:

Most Rev. (not in my mind!) Valéry Vienneau, Bishop of Bathurst
645, avenue Murray
C.P. 460
Bathurst, NB E2A 3Z4
Tel: (506) 546-1420
Fax: (506) 548-5565
E-mail: valeryv@nb.aibn.com

The GIRM for Canada!

2011-09-10T14:04:00.001-04:00

Finally, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops has announced and made available, the GIRM for Canada

Over the next few weeks, I will be providing important sections of the GIRM, the General Instruction on the Roman Missal here and my commentary. I profess no authority other than that of a Catholic layman educated in these matters. These posts will be presented here to assist you in understanding the GIRM in order to better appreciate the beauty of the liturgy and this new Missal for the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite. These posts are also intended to clarify issues that have been discussed here and which you may need in your parish to educated your friends and unfortunately, your Pastor, as the combox clearly reveals. As I said to Charlie Lewis in the National Post interview, "the better the liturgy, the better the prayer, the better the Catholic."

Given that this blog made such a noise about the kneeling posture, it is fitting that this controversy be discussed first. This writer began a series of posts on the matter of the "kneeling posture" last winter. It was a result of an investigation for the delay of the Recognitio for the Third Edition of the Roman Missal and its corresponding GIRM--General Instruction (on the Roman Missal.). The Bishops' Conferences in the Great Britain and the United States had already announced implementation for the first Sundays in September and Advent, respectively. There web pages and catechetical materials were already well-developed, but in Canada there was nothing; silence, priests knew little if anything and the people knew even less.

My investigation revealed two things; the web page of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops indicated that there would be no new GIRM for Canada until the "French" equivalent was completed (the Missal could not be implemented without the GIRM); and the knowledge from a priest friend that "they want you off your knees!'

My letter of inquiry as to the reason for the delay of the Recognitio from Rome to the General Secretary of the CCCB, Msgr. Patrick Powers was answered with the referral to a six month old blog post which I had already referred to in my letter to him and a perplexity as to what the delay in Rome could be. Further letters which included my suspicion and made it clear that this writer was not going away extracted more information including that a meeting would be held which he and the CCCB President would attend with the Congregation of Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments and that they would express "my concern" over the delay and that there was "nothing out of the ordinary" in the Canadian request. Well then, why the delay?

Around the same time, my suspicions that the kneeling issue was the reason for the hold up was confirmed when I received a copy of the actual page of the "Grey Book" (submission of the CCCB to Rome for Recognitio.)

There was the proof; the norm for kneeling in Canada would be from the end of the Sanctus to the end of the Memorial Acclamation. Bishops could instruct kneeling only at the Consecration (as per the 1975 GIRM) and where the practice of kneeling from the end of the Sanctus to the end of the Doxology and then at the Ecce Agnus Dei, it is "laudable to retain this practice." With this evidence, the CCCB finally admitted that the reason for the delay was indeed the disagreement in kneeling posture which was significantly different from that approved for Britain and America. However, I did not stop there. My research was taken up by a priest who would know whether it was legitimate or not. It was deemed credible and it was presented to a senior official in the Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments. The assurance was given; it would be further placed in "friendly hands" this would not be approved without further study at CDWDS as they agreed that the Canadian submission would result in less kneeling and stress and controvesy and the message was sent; "Canada needs more kneeling, not less!'

So what now is the kneeling posture for Canada:

43.     The faithful should stand from the beginning of the Entrance chant, or while the Priest approaches the altar, until the end of the Collect; for the Alleluia chant before the Gospel; while the Gospel itself is proclaimed; during the Profession of Faith and the Universal Prayer; and from the invitation, Orate, fratres (Pray, brethren), before the Prayer over the Offerings until the end of Mass, except at the places indicated here below.

          The faithful should sit, on the other hand, during the readings before the Gospel and the Responsorial Psalm and for the Homily and during the Preparation of the Gifts at the Offertory; and, if appropriate, during the period of sacred silence after Communion.

          In the dioceses of Canada, the faithful should kneel at the Consecration, except when prevented on occasion by ill health, or for reasons of lack of space, of the large number of people present, or for another reasonable cause.53 However, those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the Priest genuflects after the Consecration. Where it is the practice for the people to remain kneeling after the Sanctus (Holy, Holy,Holy) until the end of the Eucharistic Prayer and before Communion when the Priest says Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God), it is laudable for this practice to be retained.

         For the sake of uniformity in gestures and bodily postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the instructions which the Deacon, a lay minister, or the Priest gives, according to what is laid down in the Missal.

The rule for Canada now is consistent with the 1975 GIRM, kneeling is at the Consecration. Yet, in many parts of Canada this was never enacted. Tradition and popular piety held sway in many places for decades following the implementation of the Novus Ordo Missae and the laudable "practice' is in place in much of Canada. Where the expert liturgists could, they pushed their agenda and got many in the Maritimes, Quebec and Alberta and Manitoba off of their knees. Some initiated a compromise from end of the Sanctus to the end of the Memorial Acclamation and the Bishops of Canada wanted all three enshrined.

On this, the three variants for Canada, Rome declined and the GIRM is as above with some change in the word order that seems to be firmer. The Canadian submission was "it is laudable to retain this practice" and what was approved was "it is laudable for this practice to be retained."

While one might desire that one uniform posture, and if you read this blog you probably agree with me that it should be the most traditional manner, we now have uniformity and clarity, something lacked for decades. It is possible that in some places with the kneeling currently ending at the Memorial Acclamation they may simply extend the kneeling, but at least in one diocese according to the combox, this will not be the case, it will be only at the Consecration, a step backwards.

Rome clearly did not want to see an innovation or establish a precedent. Nowhere in the world was this Canadian third-way and compromise in place and it would not be now. Given that even in St. Peter's Basilica, kneeling or a profound bow (at the hips) is in place at the Consecration, we in Canada could hardly argue.

Now, I wish to address a note in the combox from a reader in the Diocese of London:

Interestingly, although this instruction mentions it as being laudable for the congregation to remain kneeling from the Sanctus to the end of the Cannon; this has been the practice in the Diocese of London in all of my 40 plus years.Until today.At the Vigil Mass this evening (Sept 10th) in my parish today, the Priest Celebrating the Mass, required the congregation to stand immediately AFTER the Consecration.This was something new and perhaps, the thin end of the wedge ? Has anyone else in this part of SW Ontario experienced anything similar? Are we being set-up here ?

Yes, you are being set-up and it is up to you to do something about it. The difference between you and me and our parents and our grandparents is we know! We know the truth because you've read it above and if you don't believe me you can go to the link and read it yourself because you are a grown-up Catholic now.

The Diocese of London has always followed the "laudable practice" and the Bishop of London has not changed this. There should be uniformity across a diocese, this priest has engaged in a a liturgical abuse and is being creative.

First, the GIRM does not take affect until the First Sunday of Advent, so, the priest was simply wrong to instruct you last night to stand to do this. He is being disobedient to the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, on this, there is no doubt. You have the right (under Redemptionis Sacramentum) to raise this error with him and to his bishop.

Second, the Diocese of London has indeed followed the "laudable practice." This priest, if he has read the GIRM, has not read all of paragraph 43. Let us look again what it says, "..it is a laudable for this practice to be retained." What does this mean? Laudable comes from Latin and it means, "praiseworthy". Think here of Magna cum laude (With great praise) or Laudate Dominum (Priaise the LORD) or Lauda Sion (Praise O Sion). If to do something, in this case kneeling, is "praiseworthy" what does it mean not to do it?

Each of us has the right to expect the proper implementation of this long-awaited Missal. We have the right and responsibility to act and to inform. In many places it will be up to you and me; those who Bishop Trautman of Erie called dismissively, "John and Mary Catholic" who would be too simple-mined to understand words such as "ineffable" or "gibbet" in the corrected translation, to ensure that the Missal is properly implemented. It should not be that way, but sadly, the "spirit of Vatican II" still reigns in many dioceses and in many parishes.

What will you do?

CCCB FAQ's -- More Drivel!

2011-09-07T09:49:00.001-04:00

Alerted by an erudite reader we find these interesting FAQ's from the CCCB.

Let's have a look and a comment or two, shall we?

What is the date of implementation for the new edition of the Roman Missal?
The date of implementation of the new Missal will be the first Sunday of Advent 2011. The publications team here at the CCCB have done some remarkable work these past few months to make this possible. (Yes, only after they were told in February by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments that they had no choice. They were trying to wait until a new "French" Roman Missal was complete as that was considered more important than our unity in the ROC (Rest of Canada) with the English-speaking world.)

Will the responses be the same as in the United States?

The responses at the Eucharist (Holy Sacrifice of the Mass,) will be the same for the entire English-speaking world, although we will have the proper Canadian spelling of some of the words. We are happy to report that you will be able to have your own copy of them by March - they will be published as part of Celebrate in Song, our new music and liturgy resource which is designed to supplement CBW III (Which we are still stuck with inclusive language and all forced upon the unsuspecting Church in Canada by Raymond Lahey whose name is enshrined in every book, in every parish, in every pew as to a joyous reminder of the contribution of this "kind and gentle pastor.") in the era of the new Missal. Not only will we have the new responses, we will have three musical settings of the responses which we have commissioned by us for use in Canada. They are by Canadian composers (Which are the most detestable example of church music I've ever heard.) and it is my hope that they will become fairly standard in parishes (I doubt it, not even my Praise and Worship friends are that stupid--go ahead, ask as church musician what he or she really thinks of the garbage parishes are forced to pay for.) across the country. This way we will be able to feel at home in each others' churches. The chant setting from ICEL is also included for the same reason. (Well this is simply not true, they have not used the Gloria from the chant setting by ICEL which is to appear in ALL hymnbooks because Father Bill Burke deemed it "too hard" in a letter to me.)

What should parishes do to prepare for the new edition of the Roman Missal?

Fr. Burke of the National Liturgy Office (NLO) has been working tirelessly to prepare the clergy of the country for the new edition of the Roman Missal. He has done workshops from coast to coast to coast. It is our hope that the local clergy and diocesan offices will take a prominent role in the implementation process in our churches and schools, and so this training has been a huge part of the NLO strategy around the Missal. For your parish, consider the following:

A DVD with a teaching Mass has been approved for publication and should be available by the Fall. This could form part of an information evening held by parishes or deaneries

Fr. Bill’s workshop will form part of one of the catechetical resource DVD’s that we are preparing, and can be used in the same way

Music ministers: (There is no such thing as a "Music Minister" and this term needs to stop being used -- we are Directors of Music, Choir Directors or Schola Masters) cantors, organists, instrumentalists of all kinds, choirs, should start learning our new Canadian Mass settings in Celebrate in Song

In addition there are several other resources:

NLO has entered into an agreement with Novalis to prepare a Missal resource for youth which will be a unique resource for young people to learn about the Mass. ('cause they need to be patronised and talked down to, right?)

For all Catholics the Publications Service has published the ICEL resource, Become One Body One Spirit in Christ, which will help everyone better understand the new edition. (Yes, the Brits did this and they are so far ahead of us it is embarrassing to say nothing about the Americans.)

For priests, the Publications Service has made an agreement with World Library Publications to distribute a CD recording of the new translations of Eucharistic Prayers I-IV

All of these can help us to prepare for the new edition of the Roman Missal in our own communities.

I heard that there is a new translation of the Mass that is coming out. Is that true?

Yes, it is indeed true. Even though we often look to the Church for stability in this rapidly changing world, and although it’s not always easy to accept, the Church’s prayer and worship have also changed over time.

Following many years of work and consultations (see the following question for details), changes have been made to the Mass and its translation. As we are now at the point where we need to get ready to receive this new translation, a series of questions and answers will be presented in the next few months to offer a better understanding of the changes and to prepare for them.

Change is rarely easy (Well, ya sure didn't care about the change our parents and grandparents had to endure which they didn't ask for) and it doesn’t happen automatically. You might find the upcoming changes challenging. However, we invite everyone to accompany us in this series of articles with an open mind and an open heart. Let us ask the Holy Spirit to guide us and . . . together, let us enter into the dance! (Dance? Let us enter the dance? Who actually writes this stuff?)

Why are we getting a new translation?

In the 1960's, as the bishops of the world met for the Second Vatican Council, they called for a major revision of the rites of the Mass and opened the door to the celebration of Mass in the many languages used around the world. (Actually, in Sacrosanctam Concilium they said that no changes could be made unless it was for the good of the faithful; there were eleven requests made and all of these except one, the new Lectionary with its three year-cycle, were implemented by 1965. (Google Vox Cantoris 1965 Missal). The Novus Ordo Missae was never, ever imagined or contemplated by the Father of the Council. They asked for a minor "simplification of the rubrics" already underway by 1962 and an end to "repetitions" mostly in place by 1965. They never asked for a chopping or re-writing of Collects and Postcommunions or a virtual elimination of Propers or multiple options of Pentitential Rites or Canons (Eucharistic Prayers), these were all "manufactured" as affirmed by Pope Benedict XVI in The Spirit of the Liturgy. As for the vernacular languages, this was for those parts concerning the people, the Collects and Readings. Go ahead...look it up.)

In the years that followed, much work went into those revisions. The translation of Mass texts from Latin to all those languages proved to be a major task. (Again, this is not true and it is simplistic and grossly misleading. We always had a translation in our Missals. In 1965 we had a complete and approved English translation faithful to the Latin.) As time was pressing and it was important to make those translations available as soon as possible, a first translation was prepared, which did not pretend to be either perfect or permanent. (We already had a translation in 1965 of the 1570/1962 Roman Missal. They sure pretended that it was perfect and they used a method called "dynamic equivalence" to do it and they convinced a battered Pope to agree with it.) In February 1974 the first English translation for use in Canada was approved. (Yes, finally there was an approved "Sacramentary" in 1974 and from 1969 until then they used binders on the Altar and made it up as they went along).

Eventually, work began on a number of additions to the Mass and revisions to the translations. In 2001 new directions in the translation of texts from Latin were established by the Church and in March 2002, a new edition of the Order of Mass in Latin was published. (Yes, and ordered by Blessed John Paul II!)

Since then, great strides have been made to prepare faithful translations, to get the proper approvals and to make them available to all English speaking people in a timely fashion. (Eleven years is timely) Therefore, in the near future those changes will be implemented.

How will the new translation affect me?

When the new translation of the Mass comes about, it will affect all of us, although in different ways. Priests and deacons will need to adapt to the revised texts - some texts contain very subtle differences while others have been modified considerably. Therefore, everyone will need to listen so much more carefully and to hear differently. (And it will help you pray better and understand the Mass better and receive more grace because of it and therefore be a better Catholic, a better person and you will have a stronger family and build a better world; as Father Z says, "liturgy is the tip of the spear.")

Members of the assembly (Congregation!) will need to learn new or modified responses. This requires practice and patience. Music used during Mass (i.e.: “Glory to God”, “Holy, Holy”, etc.) will need to be adapted to the new texts, requiring that we learn new music. (And the Memorial Acclamation, so why force new Lamb of God and Kyrie's on people and frankly, the Somerville, Togni and Proulx Masses were all written for 1965 "hosts" and had to be adapted for 1970, so we can go back to the originals.)

Moreover, changes being brought to the Mass are not limited to spoken or sung texts. They also touch some actions and postures during the Mass. Therefore, we will need to learn them and the times during the Mass where they occur. (Yes, we will stand as soon as the priest says; "Pray brethern (brothers and sisters)" but the CCCB still wants to amend the kneeling posture and make it different from the U.S., Britain, Ontario, B.C. and the most traditional form but since they have not yet released the GIRM, we don't know what Rome has or has not approved.)

Where does the new translation come from?

Official texts of the Mass are promulgated by the “Holy See” (the official authority of the Roman Catholic Church). (Damn near spilt my coffee on that one.) A Latin edition (editio typica) is prepared and published under the title Missale Romanum (Sacramentary or Roman Missal in English). (No! Missale Romanum means Roman Missal, not Sacramentary--sorry, you'll have to have ROMAN on the cover this time girls.)

Then, the Conference of Bishops of each country (or group of countries) in the world is responsible to prepare proper translations in the language(s) used in its country and to get them approved by the Holy See. Usually, a team of experts and bishops from various countries using the same language work together on such an enormous task. The International Committee on English in the Liturgy (usually referred to as ICEL) is responsible for the English translations. (And they did a fine job) All the bishops of participating countries then get to critique, modify and approve that work. (And they've delayed and delayed and delayed it and some, such as Bishop Trautman of Erie, have fought it.) Each Conference of Bishops also prepares a certain number of local adaptations as required by the Holy See or as requested by the bishops. Then, each Conference of Bishops must approve the translations and adaptations for use in its country/region, and present them to the Holy See for final approval. (There are certain Saints for example, not on the Universal Calendar but who pertain to a country or region.)

These steps led to the new Mass translation that we will be getting.

Do we have to use the new translations?

This kind of question is always hard to answer! A hard-line answer would simply be: “Of course we have to!” (DUH, YES, THAT IS THE ANSWER!) However, we are invited to enter into the spirit of the law and not only its letter. (AND WHAT SPIRIT MIGHT THAT BE?)

The changes being brought to the Mass apply to Roman Catholics around the world. Although the number and the nature of the changes will differ from one language to another, (No this is not true. All national conferences through their ICEL equivalents must conform to the THIRD TYPICAL EDITION and be translated in accordance with LITURGIAM AUTHENTICUM. Because English is the new "LINGUA FRANCA" and it is from English that many other translations are made the English must be particularly correct and accurate. This was mandated by the "OFFICIAL AUTHORITY..") in all of this we need to be aware that the intention stems from a constant concern to maintain the unity of our faith and worship within the whole Church. Yet, there remains a provision for creativity and adaptations which require a spirit that respects the whole celebration and the universality of the Church. Unity doesn’t always involve uniformity, but does require concerted effort and a common heart.

Are we going back to Latin?

The vernacular will most certainly continue to be used as the language of worship as established by the Second Vatican Council (No; Wrong again! Latin is and remains the first language of choice for the Mass. The Novus Ordo Missae of 1970 can always be celebrated in Latin. The Mass, celebrated in the vernacular can always have Latin Gregorian music or polyphonic motets or hymns in Latin -- why do they continue to mislead?) and reaffirmed by the NEW General Instruction of the Roman Missal. The Preamble to GIRM (2008) states in paragraph 12: “The eagerness with which this measure (use of the vernacular) was everywhere received has certainly been so great that it has led under the guidance of the Bishops and the Apostolic See itself, to permission for all liturgical celebrations in which the people participate to be in the vernacular, so that the people may more fully participate. SACROSANCTAM CONCILIUM, THE CONSTITUTION ON THE SACRED LITURGY AT THE SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL STATED THAT "LATIN IS TO BE PRESERVED" THAT THE "VERNACULAR, MAY BE USED "AND THAT "GREGORIAN CHANT HAS PRIDE OF PLACE."

Who initiated the change of translation?

In response to concerns expressed by local Bishops’ Conferences, the Congregation for Divine Worship initiated a period of study and reflection upon the current translations being used throughout the universal church. (Again, this is not true. ICEL was instructed by its members, the English speaking Bishops' Conferences, to prepare a new translation because they fundamentally new of the problems. This was completed in 1988 and rejected by the "OFFICIAL AUTHORITY." It was rejected for two reasons; First, it was still not an adequate translation; and second, the Holy Father knew he was going to promulgate a new Edition and instruct then on how it was to be translated.) This period resulted in the document entitled Liturgiam Authenticum (2001) in which specific guidelines were established for all future translations from Latin to the vernacular.

The International Commission for English in the Liturgy (ICEL) in collaboration with the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, following a long period of intense study and reflection, established a General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) and the resulting new translation of the Ordo Missae (Order of Mass) for the Canadian Church. (There is no "Canadian Church" there is the Church in Canada!) These documents were then submitted to the Congregation of Divine Worship for approval.

I thought they were done with changes!!! Why more changes now?

In the years following the Second Vatican Council, the urgency with which texts had to be translated from Latin to the vernacular languages resulted in new texts that did not always convey the full meaning of the original Latin text and omitted some very rich scriptural and patristic images.(Yes, this is true but it had nothing to do with "urgency." (This is grossly misleading and I'm tired of hearing it, it was a conspiracy to change the meaning...why else would you translate "pro multis" which means "for many" as "for all" when the Latin expression "for all" exists and it is "pro omnibus!" It was a zeitgeist that harmed our belief and the truth of Our LORD's words in scripture.) Consequently, certain key responses and prayers have now been re-translated to better express a clearer understanding of the original text. This has resulted in a new Roman Missal (Ordo Missae) (Ordo Missae means Order of Mass.-- who wrote this??? ) which is to be used during all liturgical celebrations in the Roman Rite.

The changes initiated by the Second Vatican Council are on-going. Therefore, in a Church that is alive with the Holy Spirit, we can expect that the process of change will always be present.

Copyright © 2011 Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops
2500 Don Reid Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1H 2J2 Canada

Now you know why bloggers are necessary.

You're welcome.

More on the CCCB Gloria Chant "lite" Missal Mess

2011-09-07T02:32:00.000-04:00

Thanks to a link from a series of comments on The Chant Cafe about the wretched Mass settings which we will be experiencing in Celebrate in Song we find this written about the Altar Missal:

For the chant setting of the Mass we have used the same settings as found in Celebrate in Song. These settings, specially the Glory to God in the highest and the Creed have been the most commonly used chant settings in Canada for a long time, so it seemed wise to keep them. The preface dialogue will probably sound new to Canadian ears, but it has been provided by ICEL and is a traditional form, just not the one we have been used to.

I've been in church music for over 25 years and never heard that Anonymous "chant" Gloria sung before. I'm old enough to remember the 1965 Missal and I don't recall it. We sang Somerville and one other, there was no "chant-like" or "lite" version then.

So, not only does the Father Bill Burke, Msgr. Murray Kroetch and Msgr. Powers think you're too stupid to learn the actual Roman Missal Gloria, they think that our priests are too stupid two!

Yes, Canada's expert liturgist wrote me to say that the National Liturgical Commission felt that the right Gloria was "too hard."

How did they get away with this?

Oh, the same way that they got away with the Winnipeg Statement and the NRSV Lectionary.

They dissented.

And where's the GIRM?

Run out of Town

2011-09-05T16:20:00.002-04:00

My good friend Bear over at The Spirit's Sword has written a wonderful essay on the history of the Church in the Archdiocese of Toronto. Bear also has a fascination for old churches in Ontario and has been for a few posts now highlighting some.

He has posted an old link to a story about the wonderful Church of Our Lady in Guelph and how it was almost wreckovated, "Vosko'd" if you will pardon the expression; as told by Paul Likoudis and originally published in Challenge Magazine.

Parishioners of the historic Church of Our Lady of the Immaculate in Guelph (Hamilton Diocese, Canada), known commonly as "the cathedral," rallied earlier this year to stop a drastic plan to alter the awe-inspiring interior of their magnificent church.

Father Richard Vosko, a priest of the American diocese of Albany (New York State), who had proposed the radical plan to remove the church's marble communion rail, confessionals, high altar and rearrange the pews, was still paid $60,000 for his plan to wreck the church's interior; but, parishioners will enjoy - at least for the foreseeable future - worshipping God in the magnificent surroundings crafted by their ancestors.

On Saturday, 13 March 1999, the parish priest, Monsignor John Newstead, informed parishioners that, after consultation with Bishop Anthony Tonnos of Hamilton, Fr Vosko's plan would not go forward because of overwhelming opposition by parishioners.

The Church of Our Lady of the Immaculate is an enormous neo- Gothic, twin-towered church modelled after the Cathedral of the Three Kings in Cologne, built by parishioners at the turn of the century of stone cut from local quarries.

"Basically what happened," said a parishioner active in the effort to block the 'renovation,' "is that we prevailed because we did our homework and Fr Vosko didn't. We told him that if everything was wrong, why didn't anybody tell us this for 30 years."

The parishioners' experience with Fr Vosko and his plans for the Church of Our Lady mirrors that of many other North American churches.

In the mid-1990s, Guelph's parishioners were advised that the church's leaking roof had reached such a stage of disrepair that a major renovation of the roof was in order, which was estimated to cost approximately $3 million.

Parishioners understood the importance of the work, and began fund-raising and sacrificial giving on the part of many. However, before that fund-raising period was completed, Monsignor John Newstead announced his plan to "restore the interior." "People thought 'restoration' meant restoration," a parishioner said, "that dilapidated and worn out material would be replaced."

'Renovations'

Then, in May of last year, Monsignor Newstead informed parishioners that the Church of Our Lady had contracted with Albany priest, Fr Richard Vosko, to come in and offer lectures and advice on how to renovate the church. "That's when we learned there was more afoot than just freshening things up. Fr Vosko told us that, under Vatican II, the altar and its ornate surrounds were wrong and had to be removed; the altar rail should not be there; a recently-installed elevator to help access our handicapped people was in the wrong place; the altar itself had to come forward so no-one would be more than 60 feet from it; the baptismal font and confessionals were in the wrong places.

"He didn't even like the big heavy wooden doors with their huge iron hinges. He said they were most unwelcoming. What Fr Vosko didn't know is that these doors were very welcoming to us. Many of the parishioners came from lands where their parents and grandparents were persecuted for the faith, and those heavy doors were most welcoming because people knew they could find sanctuary in the church. Fr Vosko wanted to take those doors off."

As is often the case in other parishes where Fr Vosko works, parishioners are never informed in advance that Fr Vosko has been retained, the cost of his services, and how he is to be paid. "We were simply invited to attend workshops to hear some proposals," said the parishioner. "We were told the renovation process would be 'open.' We were told, 'It's your church. We want your opinion'."

In May 1998, Fr Vosko gave his first presentation, and then returned a month later to give an update, speaking each time to about 350 of the parish's 1,500 members. To most, Fr Vosko appeared arrogant, brash and insulting. "People were stunned and shocked by his presentation. Disbelief at his proposals was widespread. We couldn't believe a stranger would come into our church and tell us everything was wrong with it," said the parishioner.

As a result of those two meetings, upset parishioners began meeting on their own and formed a committee to oppose Fr Vosko's proposals, and eventually formed the Committee for the Preservation of the Interior of the Church of Our Lady, with eight parishioners taking the lead. The newly-formed preservation committee held a number of public meetings, and it soon became apparent that a sizeable majority of the parishioners opposed Fr Vosko's plans.

At one of the meetings, the group obtained 500 signatures on a petition to stop Fr Vosko's plan. Despite rising opposition, however, the "core committee" formed to ruin the church resisted popular reaction. The preservation committee made strenuous efforts to have a meeting with the "core committee," but were rebuffed repeatedly.

Finally, the preservation committee was able to meet with two members of the "core committee" to present their views, at which time they asked its co-chairmen to present the views of the preservationists to the full committee. The "core committee" members were reluctant. Still the preservationists persisted. Finally, after three months, the core co-chairs relented and allowed the preservationists to present their views.

Program dropped

At that meeting, the members of the "core committee" sat in stony silence, not once uttering any comment or acknowledgement, and the meeting adjourned. Time passed, and the preservationists asked for another meeting.

Just before Christmas 1998, the request for a second meeting was granted. At that subsequent meeting, the preservationists were given the "Vosko II" report, which detailed the changes approved for the church - despite the fact parishioners had been told repeatedly no decisions had been made.

"So we spent most of the Christmas period preparing a five-page brief in response," a member of the committee said. "We presented that in early January, and to this day, we have not received any comment.

"However, that doesn't matter. Subsequently, the preservation committee called a general meeting of the whole parish - including the "core committee" - and we outlined the entire procedure to date. The parishioners were vociferous in their response, and made it very clear they did not want Fr Vosko's proposed changes." After that 9 March meeting, parishioners were informed the following Saturday by Monsignor Newstead that he had discussed the matter with the bishop, and "in view of the divisiveness which had occurred, the program had been dropped in its entirety."

This report (here edited) originally appeared in the Canadian Catholic journal 'Challenge'.

Well, I just checked out the website of the good Father Vosko. The destruction on the Cathedrals of Milwaukee and Rochester is well known; even Rome tried to stop Rembert Weakland from the destruction (oh well, they couldn't stop him on anything else so this seems rather trite). There are almost 40 wreckovations listed. Let's see, he was paid $60,000 for doing nothing in Guelph, if he was paid $100,000 for doing something in these places, that's $4,000,000.00!

Not bad for a priestly career eh?

Aloysius Cardinal Ambrozic, Requiescat in pace

2011-08-26T16:10:00.002-04:00

Una Voce Toronto Choir

2011-08-17T06:00:00.003-04:00

Over the last few months, Una Voce Toronto has been promoting and organizing the holy Mass on specific feast days in the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite in Toronto.

On Corpus Christi at St. Mark's over 225 attended a Missa Solemnis and a few evenings ago on the Feast of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary over 375 attended the Missa Cantata.

With the direction of the Board of Una Voce Toronto, Vox is forming the Una Voce Toronto Choir to be available for various Masses which we sponsor over the course of the year.

The next are:

September 14, Holy Cross in Mississauga
November 1, All Saints in Etobicoke
December 8, Immaculate Conception in Richmond Hill

The music programs will include the Gregorian Chant Propers, Gregorian Ordinaries for Mass IV Cunctipotens Genitor Deus, Mass VII Missa de Angelis, Mass IX Cum Jubilo and the Requiem Mass. Polyphonic Masses will include the Mass for Three Voices by William Byrd and the Missa Salve Regina by Christoph Dalitz with motets by Palestrina, Arcadelt and others as part of the preliminary plan.

Choir practices will be every Tuesday beginning in September at a central location.

For more information:

unavocetoronto@gmail.com

The Latin Mass and one priest's 'science fiction'

2011-08-14T07:08:00.003-04:00

On this early Sunday morning, I found this in my inbox from Matt C. Abbott:

Matt C. Abbott column

The Latin Mass and one priest's 'science fiction'

Matt C. Abbott

Matt C. Abbott
August 14, 2011

In a recent parish bulletin, Father Bill Conway, pastor of Divine Savior Parish in the Diocese of Joliet, Ill., wrote (excerpted and slightly edited; click here to see the bulletin):

It is worth one's time to consider what some of the Church's leading theologians at the Second Vatican Council thought and wrote concerning the Eucharist and liturgy. In recent years one hears some speaking of the role of the priest in the liturgy as acting in persona Christi ('in the person of Christ'). My fear with such language is that it may have the effect of clericalizing the celebration of the Eucharist, making the assembly once again a passive observer....

While I respect the decision of the Holy Father to permit the extraordinary rite of the Tridentine Mass (please note 'extraordinary'), my criticism of this form is that by the very manner of its celebration it renders the role of the laity to being little more than onlooker. In fact, it was precisely because of this that the Council Fathers in Sacrosanctum Concilium mandated the reform of the Latin Rite of the Catholic Mass: 'In the restoration and promotion of the sacred liturgy, this full and active participation by all the people is the aim to be considered before all else (#14).'

Phrases such as in persona Christi [and] ad orientem, I believe, run contrary not only to the spirit of Vatican II but to the very tradition of the Church. Jesus did not celebrate the Last Supper with His back to the apostles (ad orientem) but rather reclined at table with them....

I asked Father John Trigilio Jr., president of the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy, to comment on Father Conway's assertions. Father Trigilio, as he has done on previous occasions, graciously provided me with the following response:

Father Conway needs to reread the actual texts of the Second Vatican Council as well as the Catechism of the Catholic Church. His Eucharistic theology is interesting, but not Catholic. If he has a problem with the notion of 'in persona Christi,' then he has a problem with Holy Mother Church.

The conciliar document Presbyterorum Ordinis had this to say about the phrase 'in persona Christi' in relationship to the priesthood: 'Priests act especially in the person of Christ as ministers of holy things, particularly in the Sacrifice of the Mass, the sacrifice of Christ who gave Himself for the sanctification of men.'

'Thirty years later, the Catechism of the Catholic Church reaffirms this teaching:

'It is in representing [Christ] that the bishop or priest acting in the person of Christ the head (in persona Christi capitis) presides over the assembly, speaks after the readings, receives the offerings, and says the Eucharistic Prayer.' (1348)

'Only validly ordained priests can preside at the Eucharist and consecrate the bread and the wine so that they become the Body and Blood of the Lord.' (1411)

Lex orandi, lex credendi. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass embodies what Catholicism believes about the Holy Eucharist. The teachings on the ministerial priesthood and on the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass are embodied in how the Mass is celebrated. What we believe and how we worship are integrally and organically connected.

The congregation does not consecrate bread and wine. The common priesthood of the baptized faithful does not have the power to transubstantiate bread and wine into the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ. The ordained ministerial priesthood alone acts in persona Christi and consecrates bread and wine into the Real Presence for the sake of the people of God. Needing to be spiritually fed, the priest, like Moses of old, provided food for the journey. The manna given in church is the Precious Body and Blood of Christ. The people receive and are fed. The priest is the one who provides and then feeds the people the bread from Heaven.

The faithful participate in the sacrifice by their offering of themselves. This is why the English translation of the Roman Missal is being corrected to have the priest say at the preparation of the gifts: 'Pray, brothers and sisters, that my sacrifice and yours may be acceptable to God, the almighty Father.' Previously, the English said 'our sacrifice' even though the Latin was always ut meum ac vestrum sacrificium so as to distinguish the sacrifice of the priest (who acts in persona Christi as an 'alter Christus') from the sacrifice of the faithful.

Divine worship and Church doctrine coincide and correspond with one another. A theology based on the premise that the congregation or the common priesthood of the baptized consecrates the bread and wine at Mass is not Catholic (and certainly not Eastern Orthodox, either). What also worries me is the one-liner in Father Conway's bulletin: 'Would that those who wish to restrict or limit the presence and active participation of women in the liturgy take heed.'

Sounds dangerously close to a heretical notion some dissident priests — and one or two nutty bishops — have been recently espousing. Ordinatio Sacerdotalis ended the debate once and for all. It is an infallible teaching of the Church that only baptized males can be ordained. It is also infallible teaching that only the priest consecrates the bread and wine at Mass.

I suggest that [Father Conway] get some remedial catechesis so he can better instruct his flock on what the Church truly teaches as opposed to his own personal theories, which are more akin to science fiction than divinely-revealed truth.

Responding to the same commentary, Susan Gorski of Illinois sent the following (edited) email to Father Conway:

'I write to you out of concern for your commentary about acting 'in persona Christi' in your July 31 bulletin. You write about your fears and you criticized a form of worship that is centuries old. Clericalizing the celebration of the Eucharist? I thought it required a priest to consecrate the host into the Body and Blood of our Divine Lord; is this no longer true? Do you openly express that you think the pope was wrong? Do you doubt transubstantiation?

'You criticize the extraordinary form of the Mass as though it demotes humanity and relegates them to mere onlookers; but that is not true. In the Tridentine rite, everyone participates in the worship of God as led by the priest by intelligently and reverently praying the Mass.

'The blurring of the distinction and dignity that is the institutional priesthood appears to be a desire to dissolve the priesthood entirely. One of the exact titles of the papacy is Servus Servorum, or servant of the servants. This is an indicator of the responsibility you hold as a priest for the care of the souls in your charge.

'Are you to be a shepherd of the flock, or a hireling that runs away when the going gets difficult? This is a major difference between a priest and a lay minster. Are there wolves out there ready to scatter the flock? Perhaps you do not believe in an actual devil. If you do not believe in the devil, then who is doing his work now? Is there not evil in this world that is beyond the scope of social justice, or is that all there is?

'I've heard a number of priests in the Diocese of Joliet say they believe that salvation of souls is achievable through social justice — and they do not believe that the most important work of the priest is the salvation of souls through the sacraments. They feel salvation comes mostly or entirely through social justice; but this is only a very small portion of their priestly responsibility.

'In the Traditional rite, the priest leads the people in worship of God and the people follow in worship to God. The priest is a servant of the people by being a servant to God first. He is to uphold the faith, he is to care for his flock, and if he should lose one of them, he should go out and search until he finds the lost sheep. This is the traditional priesthood.

'Priests' hands are anointed for a reason. He is not a hireling; he is married to the Church and is to be her defender. So why do you question the teaching of the Magisterium on in persona Christi? Why do you fear it? Do you doubt your faith? This is what I read when I read your column in the bulletin. Sharing that doubt and fear with your flock means their shepherd isn't comfortable upholding the teachings of the Church.

'I am praying for you, Father Conway.'

Matt C. Abbott is a Catholic columnist with a Bachelor of Arts degree in Communication, Media and Theatre from Northeastern Illinois University in Chicago, and an Associate in Applied Science degree in Business Management from Triton College in River Grove, Ill. He has worked in the right-to-life movement and is a published writer focused on Catholic and social issues. He can be reached at mattcabbott@gmail.com.

(Note: I welcome thoughtful feedback from readers. If you want our correspondence to remain confidential, please specify as such in your initial e-mail to me. However, I reserve the right to forward and/or publish e-mails — complete with e-mail addresses — that are accusatory, insulting or threatening in nature, even if said e-mails are marked confidential. Also, for subscribers to my column, please e-mail me directly instead of simply hitting "Reply" to the e-mail sent to you by the RenewAmerica site. Thank you and God bless!)

© Copyright 2011 by Matt C. Abbott
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/abbott/110814

Vox Cantoris

Toronto Missa Solemnis-Candlemas

Bishop Athanasius Schneider--"Communion in the hand must go!"

Bishop Schneider: Hand Communion Must Go

Michael Voris and the Archdiocese of Detroit

The Epiphany of the LORD

Another great Churchman from Quebec

Responsorial Psalm Comparison

Thomas Christopher Cardinal Collins

Just mellowing out...

Epiphany Missa Cantata in Toronto

Et Verbum Caro Factum Est

The Christmas Letter

Make him Mr. Lahey Now!

Toronto Missa Cantata-Epiphany of the LORD

SSPX Assessment of "Doctrinal Preamble"

Divinum Officium and daily Missa - On-line Resources

From the new and improved ICEL

Scarboro Foreign Mission Syncretism

"For All" or "For Many"...whatever

Why are "trads" so ignorant and nasty?

More on St. Michael's Cathedral Music

O Mary, conceived without sin...

Missa Solemnis in Toronto - Immaculate Conception

Archbishop Prendergast read the GIRM!

The Prairie Messenger: Source of the Problem?

Is the Bishop of London listening?

What Arinze said...

Hey Moncton: Stand Up for Yourselves and Kneel Down!

It's "my church" you silly cookie worshipper!

The Sin of "Spiritual Pride" in the Diocese of London!

Catholics in Canada: Rise Up and Kneel Down!

A Metropolitan See and its Wayward London Child

And with your spirit

Somebody reviles Vox; Blest am I

Cardinal condemns "Ladder-climber's self interest"

Celebrate in Song: Two critiques of the new CCCB booklet

Salt + Light Features Pro-Abortion Communist and Anti-Catholic bigot!

Celebrate in Song---Conflicted Interest

Vatican instructions on liturgical music, architecture coming soon tweetmeme_service = 'bit.ly'; tweetmeme_style = 'compact'; November 22, 2011

Toronto: A Renovation Gone Awry!

On the Corrected Translaton of the Roman Missal

Dear Bishop

Me too.

The GIRM and the Calgarian Catholic Church

All Saints Missa Solemnis - Toronto

Fighting Back With Truth and Clarity

We've got mail...

The Gloria you should all be singing!

The Proper thing to do!

Considering the GIRM II: Posture for Holy Communion

Considering the GIRM I: The Kyrie

The opposite of laudable.

How we Communicate

Not one penny!

The GIRM for Canada!

CCCB FAQ's -- More Drivel!

More on the CCCB Gloria Chant "lite" Missal Mess

Run out of Town

Aloysius Cardinal Ambrozic, Requiescat in pace

Una Voce Toronto Choir

The Latin Mass and one priest's 'science fiction'

Vatican instructions on liturgical music, architecture coming soon
November 22, 2011