Some thoughts on the Motu Proprio

With today's Motu Proprio, Pope Benedict XVI begins to roll away the cumbersome stone of misinterpretation of Vatican II that has been with the Church for the past 40 years. The crux of the document seems to be that such misinterpretation and agenda-driven running wild directly following the Second Vatican Council is what drove masses of people, old, and, now, young, into begging for the return of the Latin Mass and now, sadly, has caused some groups to split with the Church over the issue. John Paul II in his document Ecclesia Dei, encouraged a "a wide and generous application" of the Latin Mass, but many bishops openly resisted its use.

In the explanatory letter accompanying the motu proprio, the Holy Father talks about the reason for the surprising tenacity with which some of the faithful held onto the Latin Rite Mass:

This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear.

This is the crux of the issue, I think. When "everything changed" in the mid-1960's, suddenly so much of what had been taught was seemingly completely thrown out. Much of the "creativity" that occurred with the "New Mass" was pointedly against Catholic Church teaching, and, we are now paying the price for generations of the faithful (and now, many priests, sadly) who have grown up with this nebulous non-teaching education, both formally (in religious education classes of various stripes) as well as by osmosis (in what they saw going on around them in the Mass.)

The Holy Father responds to fears that the "freeing" of the Latin Mass will cause a split in parishes between those preferring it and those preferring the Novus Ordo--Mass in the Common Language, (also known as the Mass of Pope Paul VI).

The most sure guarantee that the Missal of Paul VI can unite parish communities and be loved by them consists in its being celebrated with great reverence in harmony with the liturgical directives. This will bring out the spiritual richness and the theological depth of this Missal.

In other words, if the transition to the Mass (in English) had gone the way Vatican II documents prescribed and assumed it would, we might not have had this outcry for the so-called "Old Mass" (also known as Tridentine or Latin Mass) in the first place. Further, those preferring to hear Mass in English would not feel so threatened by those preferring to hear the Mass in Latin (and vice versa) because both versions of the Roman Rite (and the Pope stresses they are both the same rite) would be said reverently and be recognizable as The (same) Mass.

In the 40 years since Vatican II, we have lost a sense of what The Mass is. In the resulting vacuum, people have substituted other meanings for The Mass (which is now more often than not, called anything but "Mass" these days). With the Motu Proprio, the Holy Father is bringing back the real meaning of the Mass.

Some thoughts on the Motu Proprio

With today's Motu Proprio, Pope Benedict XVI begins to roll away the cumbersome stone of misinterpretation of Vatican II that has been with the Church for the past 40 years. The crux of the document seems to be that such misinterpretation and agenda-driven running wild directly following the Second Vatican Council is what drove masses of people, old, and, now, young, into begging for the return of the Latin Mass and now, sadly, has caused some groups to split with the Church over the issue. John Paul II in his document Ecclesia Dei, encouraged a "a wide and generous application" of the Latin Mass, but many bishops openly resisted its use.

In the explanatory letter accompanying the motu proprio, the Holy Father talks about the reason for the surprising tenacity with which some of the faithful held onto the Latin Rite Mass:

This occurred above all because in many places celebrations were not faithful to the prescriptions of the new Missal, but the latter actually was understood as authorizing or even requiring creativity, which frequently led to deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear.

This is the crux of the issue, I think. When "everything changed" in the mid-1960's, suddenly so much of what had been taught was seemingly completely thrown out. Much of the "creativity" that occurred with the "New Mass" was pointedly against Catholic Church teaching, and, we are now paying the price for generations of the faithful (and now, many priests, sadly) who have grown up with this nebulous non-teaching education, both formally (in religious education classes of various stripes) as well as by osmosis (in what they saw going on around them in the Mass.)

The Holy Father responds to fears that the "freeing" of the Latin Mass will cause a split in parishes between those preferring it and those preferring the Novus Ordo--Mass in the Common Language, (also known as the Mass of Pope Paul VI).

The most sure guarantee that the Missal of Paul VI can unite parish communities and be loved by them consists in its being celebrated with great reverence in harmony with the liturgical directives. This will bring out the spiritual richness and the theological depth of this Missal.

In other words, if the transition to the Mass (in English) had gone the way Vatican II documents prescribed and assumed it would, we might not have had this outcry for the so-called "Old Mass" (also known as Tridentine or Latin Mass) in the first place. Further, those preferring to hear Mass in English would not feel so threatened by those preferring to hear the Mass in Latin (and vice versa) because both versions of the Roman Rite (and the Pope stresses they are both the same rite) would be said reverently and be recognizable as The (same) Mass.

In the 40 years since Vatican II, we have lost a sense of what The Mass is. In the resulting vacuum, people have substituted other meanings for The Mass (which is now more often than not, called anything but "Mass" these days). With the Motu Proprio, the Holy Father is bringing back the real meaning of the Mass.

Poison Iiiivyyyyyy

Ok. I've been trying to garden. I moved my poor St. Francis statue out from among the overgrown plants in the garden to sit in front of the bird feeder so I can see him. I moved a few trees that had planted themselves in our already crowded garden to sit around St. Francis.

So, now I have poison ivy. It was my own fault, for, although I had worn gloves (mostly!) I didn't wear a long sleeved shirt. I should have. Too late now.

Now that I *have* poison ivy, how do I get rid of it? I have hydrocortizone cream that I'm slathing on there and it sort of works.

Any suggestions on poison ivy treatment would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

Poison Iiiivyyyyyy

Ok. I've been trying to garden. I moved my poor St. Francis statue out from among the overgrown plants in the garden to sit in front of the bird feeder so I can see him. I moved a few trees that had planted themselves in our already crowded garden to sit around St. Francis.

So, now I have poison ivy. It was my own fault, for, although I had worn gloves (mostly!) I didn't wear a long sleeved shirt. I should have. Too late now.

Now that I *have* poison ivy, how do I get rid of it? I have hydrocortizone cream that I'm slathing on there and it sort of works.

Any suggestions on poison ivy treatment would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

Narcissistic Self Worship--is it in your hymnal?

The idea for this next post was shamelessly stolen from Overheard in the Sacristy. It hit me, not only because banal lyrics for "church songs" (can't really call them hymns) is one of my pet peeves, but also because the contrast between some of these songs and the hymns from my previous post is glaringly obvious.

Ok, on to the post. Most "modern" church music is badly written, musically, and close to heretically written, lyrically. Many of these songs are virtually impossible for large groups to sing, having been written by and for solo guitar and voice.

The lyrics are even worse. Besides the confusing habit that new church songs have of letting the congregation sing from the point of view of GOD (gee, do you think this is UNINTENTIONAL?!), there are lyrics in the Eucharistic section of our "hymnal" that insist on talking over and over about the "bread and wine" and how we are "gathering" at the "table". People, if it's just bread and wine--if it's just a table--it's NOT a Catholic Church!!! You can do that at home!

The Worst of the Narcissistic Navel Gazing Offenders

In his article Ritus Narcissus: Why Do We Sing Ourselves and Celebrate Ourselves, Father Paul Scalia talks about a number of the worst of these songs.

"Bread of Life" by Rory Cooney has some of the most anti-Catholic lyrics you will come across in a Catholic Church.

I myself am the bread of life.
You and I are the bread of life
taken and blessed
broken and shared
by Christ
that the world may live.

Similarly, "The Bread that we Share" by Dominic MacAller says the following:

We become for each other
the bread,
the cup.

I DON'T THINK SO! If "you and I" are the Bread of Life, then we are in big trouble and all that the Church teaches is in vain. If you want a totally symbolic Eucharist, there are many, many Protestant churches to choose from. You can even start your own!

This next one, I think, should be the Narcissistic National Anthem. It is, appropriately enough, called "Anthem" by Tom Conry.

We are called,
We are chosen.
We are Christ for one another.
We are promise to tomorrow while we are for him today.
We are sign.
We are wonder.
We are sower.
We are seed.
We are harvest.
We are hunger.
We are question.
We are creed.

NOoooooooooooo! Tell me this song is not "all about me"! This song DARES to take images from Scripture that are about God Himself, and turn them into a song all about human beings!! How many times can one song that we are supposed to sing in church, in the very Presence of God, put the word "we" in it?!?! The audacity makes me speechless.

The Church is not "all about me". We do not go to church to discover ourselves, to celebrate ourselves or to feel good about ourselves. We go to church to worship. The very concept of worship means that we are worshiping a Higher Power--higher than ourselves. Higher than we could ever be. We are not the Bread of Life. We are not Christ. We are not The Sower. We are not Creed.

Sadly, generations have now grown up on this anti-Catholic crap. Many have no idea of the musical and lyrical beauty that is the heritage of the Catholic Church, and, as a result, many do not know the very teachings of the Church, because the "hymns" they sang at Mass every week went completely against those teachings.

Narcissistic Self Worship--is it in your hymnal?

The idea for this next post was shamelessly stolen from Overheard in the Sacristy. It hit me, not only because banal lyrics for "church songs" (can't really call them hymns) is one of my pet peeves, but also because the contrast between some of these songs and the hymns from my previous post is glaringly obvious.

Ok, on to the post. Most "modern" church music is badly written, musically, and close to heretically written, lyrically. Many of these songs are virtually impossible for large groups to sing, having been written by and for solo guitar and voice.

The lyrics are even worse. Besides the confusing habit that new church songs have of letting the congregation sing from the point of view of GOD (gee, do you think this is UNINTENTIONAL?!), there are lyrics in the Eucharistic section of our "hymnal" that insist on talking over and over about the "bread and wine" and how we are "gathering" at the "table". People, if it's just bread and wine--if it's just a table--it's NOT a Catholic Church!!! You can do that at home!

The Worst of the Narcissistic Navel Gazing Offenders

In his article Ritus Narcissus: Why Do We Sing Ourselves and Celebrate Ourselves, Father Paul Scalia talks about a number of the worst of these songs.

"Bread of Life" by Rory Cooney has some of the most anti-Catholic lyrics you will come across in a Catholic Church.

I myself am the bread of life.
You and I are the bread of life
taken and blessed
broken and shared
by Christ
that the world may live.

Similarly, "The Bread that we Share" by Dominic MacAller says the following:

We become for each other
the bread,
the cup.

I DON'T THINK SO! If "you and I" are the Bread of Life, then we are in big trouble and all that the Church teaches is in vain. If you want a totally symbolic Eucharist, there are many, many Protestant churches to choose from. You can even start your own!

This next one, I think, should be the Narcissistic National Anthem. It is, appropriately enough, called "Anthem" by Tom Conry.

We are called,
We are chosen.
We are Christ for one another.
We are promise to tomorrow while we are for him today.
We are sign.
We are wonder.
We are sower.
We are seed.
We are harvest.
We are hunger.
We are question.
We are creed.

NOoooooooooooo! Tell me this song is not "all about me"! This song DARES to take images from Scripture that are about God Himself, and turn them into a song all about human beings!! How many times can one song that we are supposed to sing in church, in the very Presence of God, put the word "we" in it?!?! The audacity makes me speechless.

The Church is not "all about me". We do not go to church to discover ourselves, to celebrate ourselves or to feel good about ourselves. We go to church to worship. The very concept of worship means that we are worshiping a Higher Power--higher than ourselves. Higher than we could ever be. We are not the Bread of Life. We are not Christ. We are not The Sower. We are not Creed.

Sadly, generations have now grown up on this anti-Catholic crap. Many have no idea of the musical and lyrical beauty that is the heritage of the Catholic Church, and, as a result, many do not know the very teachings of the Church, because the "hymns" they sang at Mass every week went completely against those teachings.

My Favorite Latin and English Hymns

Dymphna's Road has a nice, short music meme, which I've managed to make into an hours-long research project! It asks you to list your favorite Latin and English hymns. Where possible, I've included links to the actual song for those who are curious about some of the pieces. You may have to find the link once you get to the page.


Favorite Latin Hymns

Ave Maria--Gounod [I sing this one often, at weddings, and, once at a funeral.]

Adeste Fideles

Pange Lingua/Tantum Ergo

Gloria by John Rutter [This is worth listening to, IMO. Click on the link and then click on the second blue button--under "John Rutter--Gloria III." I sang this in my first year in college. What a privilege! It is sad that I learned more liturgical Latin in a public--very NON-Catholic--college than anywhere else.]

Ave Verum Corpus Sang this one in College as well.

Tu Es Petrus [Our college choir sang this song during the Mass that John Paul II had in the Mall in Washington in October of 1979.]

Hodie Christus Natus Est (You may have to scroll down to track 4--"Procession". It starts very softly.)


Favorite English Hymns

O Sacred Head Surrounded

Let all Mortal Flesh Keep Silence

What Wondrous Love is This

Precious Lord [We sang this in college too. Beautiful.]

This Little Babe [I sang this in High School, believe it or not. Also a great privilege. For this one, you may have to scroll down to track 10.] (They don't have the entire song on there, but you'll get the idea. The whole CD is fantastic.)

If I had my hymnal at home, I'm sure I could go on and on. But I don't, so I'd better stop now!