Points to Ponder:
To act kindly toward others is the mystical life. The true mystic is not caught up in asceticism. Being generous, patient and compassionate to all despite interruptions in one’s life requires heroic holiness. Penance and mortification are measures to check human nature that has been irreparably damaged. Only constant vigilance can contain the ever-present weakness of the flesh, which has its own laws and tendencies. One attempts to receive charity through penance and never to attempt to gain something through one’s effort. Charity is not only a gift but God’s greatest gift that is bestowed and not earned.
Sharing charity, acting charitable and sometimes keeping quiet when one feels like criticizing, complaining and getting angry can only be achieved by supernatural graces. Charity is one. There is really only one charity and it embraces God and all of God’s creatures. It is impossible to have only one half of charity. To profess to love God and not neighbor is a hoax. To say one loves neighbor and not God is a myth.
All people are mystics to some degree. Lovers of humanity reveal Christ. Lovers of Christ reveal their concern for all humanity. The mystic aims to find God not only in his soul but everywhere and especially in being nice and kind to people. [Doctors of the Catholic Church Homepage: Excerpt from the Page on St. John of the Cross]
Saturday, March 06, 2004
A Monitum or Receiving Email From Me:
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
This morning I received an email from a friend who was asking me about an attachment I had supposedly sent them. The email subject title read "read it immediately." The long and short of it is that I did not send them the email. I was going to confine the matter to the private note to them about it which I already sent but then after sending it, I discovered that the same thing had happened to me.
For I supposely received this morning an email from another friend. It said in the subjectline "something for you" and when I opened it, there is a single word "misc" and an attachment. For that reason, I am quite sure the latter friend did not send this email to me and it was deleted unread. My guess is there is a new technique out there for sending viruses or other questionable materials where the spammer somehow obtains email addresses which are commonly received at one's email and tries to fool them that way into opening attachments.{1}
Essentially my friends, I should note up front that I delete all emails that are like the one I got this morning. I would suggest that everyone do the same unless there is ample reason to believe that the person actually sent it. For the record, the email I supposedly sent the first friend with the subjectline "read it immediately" -let this post bear witness to the fact that I will never sent any emails with that kind of message in the subject line. (Nor to my knowledge have I ever done so.) Therefore, if one arrives in the future with a similar message from the email address attached to this humble weblog, feel free to presume that it is a fraud and delete it. Because I assure you, it will be.
Also this morning, I fell for a trick whereby I opened an email with the subjectline "stalin." At first I thought it was from someone calling me names{2} but it ended up being a piece of spam. So I will redouble my efforts to delete unread anything that does not have an unambiguous subject title to it. So be warned in advance all of you because I am not about to be opening anything with attachments that does not bear clear and unambiguous evidence of being legitimate.{3}
Another way of saying it for people who have not emailed me -or have done so very seldom- is this: if you are not "grandfathered" in with me emailing-wise, do not send attachments because I will not read them. And any attachments that come from me with subject line commands to "read immediately" or some other statement, again delete it because such a note will not be arriving from me. Any attachments I send to people are to notes which invariably bear witness to the authenticity of the sender. And one of those notes is not a subject line command (or exhortation of any sort) to open an attachment as if there is some urgency to do so.
And I suppose if I do not say it someone else will so if it is an ultra-short email with attachment, it is definitely not from me. (Unless the including text makes it unambiguously clear that it is.) As a rule, the only short emails I send when I do are to weblog or essay links or very short notes without attachments.
Notes:
{1} I am sure it can be done though I have no idea how it would be done.
{2} Sadly that still happens at times from people who have heard of me and have illusions as to what I have said on a (usually "traditionalist" related) subject. As inevitable as the sun rising in the east, they have either not read my work or they did so very superficially and have seriously misunderstood what was written. (Not to mention the frequent incapability many of them have of having an intelligent conversation.) Usually it takes a few exchanges to separate the wheat from the chaff in these situations but I digress.
{3} As I do not have the time nor the desire to waste my time with spam or spam-related products.
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
This morning I received an email from a friend who was asking me about an attachment I had supposedly sent them. The email subject title read "read it immediately." The long and short of it is that I did not send them the email. I was going to confine the matter to the private note to them about it which I already sent but then after sending it, I discovered that the same thing had happened to me.
For I supposely received this morning an email from another friend. It said in the subjectline "something for you" and when I opened it, there is a single word "misc" and an attachment. For that reason, I am quite sure the latter friend did not send this email to me and it was deleted unread. My guess is there is a new technique out there for sending viruses or other questionable materials where the spammer somehow obtains email addresses which are commonly received at one's email and tries to fool them that way into opening attachments.{1}
Essentially my friends, I should note up front that I delete all emails that are like the one I got this morning. I would suggest that everyone do the same unless there is ample reason to believe that the person actually sent it. For the record, the email I supposedly sent the first friend with the subjectline "read it immediately" -let this post bear witness to the fact that I will never sent any emails with that kind of message in the subject line. (Nor to my knowledge have I ever done so.) Therefore, if one arrives in the future with a similar message from the email address attached to this humble weblog, feel free to presume that it is a fraud and delete it. Because I assure you, it will be.
Also this morning, I fell for a trick whereby I opened an email with the subjectline "stalin." At first I thought it was from someone calling me names{2} but it ended up being a piece of spam. So I will redouble my efforts to delete unread anything that does not have an unambiguous subject title to it. So be warned in advance all of you because I am not about to be opening anything with attachments that does not bear clear and unambiguous evidence of being legitimate.{3}
Another way of saying it for people who have not emailed me -or have done so very seldom- is this: if you are not "grandfathered" in with me emailing-wise, do not send attachments because I will not read them. And any attachments that come from me with subject line commands to "read immediately" or some other statement, again delete it because such a note will not be arriving from me. Any attachments I send to people are to notes which invariably bear witness to the authenticity of the sender. And one of those notes is not a subject line command (or exhortation of any sort) to open an attachment as if there is some urgency to do so.
And I suppose if I do not say it someone else will so if it is an ultra-short email with attachment, it is definitely not from me. (Unless the including text makes it unambiguously clear that it is.) As a rule, the only short emails I send when I do are to weblog or essay links or very short notes without attachments.
Notes:
{1} I am sure it can be done though I have no idea how it would be done.
{2} Sadly that still happens at times from people who have heard of me and have illusions as to what I have said on a (usually "traditionalist" related) subject. As inevitable as the sun rising in the east, they have either not read my work or they did so very superficially and have seriously misunderstood what was written. (Not to mention the frequent incapability many of them have of having an intelligent conversation.) Usually it takes a few exchanges to separate the wheat from the chaff in these situations but I digress.
{3} As I do not have the time nor the desire to waste my time with spam or spam-related products.
Friday, March 05, 2004
Meditations on The Dark Night of the Soul:
(Aka "the Rerum Novarum 2004 Lenten Spiritual Instruction")
The previous installment of this series can be read HERE. To start from the beginning of this series, please go HERE.
CHAPTER II
Of certain spiritual imperfections which beginners have with respect to the habit of pride.
[Though there is something in this section that applies to all of us; the next six paragraphs -either all or in part- apply in particular to many if not most of those who take the position of being "more 'traditional' than thou." -ISM]
AS these beginners feel themselves to be very fervent and diligent in spiritual things and devout exercises, from this prosperity (although it is true that holy things of their own nature cause humility) there often comes to them, through their imperfections, a certain kind of secret pride, whence they come to have some degree of satisfaction with their works and with themselves. And hence there comes to them likewise a certain desire, which is somewhat vain, and at times very vain, to speak of spiritual things in the presence of others, and sometimes even to teach such things rather than to learn them.
They condemn others in their heart when they see that they have not the kind of devotion which they themselves desire; and sometimes they even say this in words, herein resembling the Pharisee, who boasted of himself, praising God for his own good works and despising the publican.[St. Luke xviii, 11-12.]
In these persons the devil often increases the fervour that they have and the desire to perform these and other works more frequently, so that their pride and presumption may grow greater. For the devil knows quite well that all these works and virtues which they perform are not only valueless to them, but even become vices in them.
And such a degree of evil are some of these persons wont to reach that they would have none appear good save themselves; and thus, in deed and word, whenever the opportunity occurs, they condemn them and slander them, beholding the mote in their brother's eye and not considering the beam which is in their own;[St. Matthew vii, 3.] they strain at another's gnat and themselves swallow a camel.[St. Matthew xxiii, 24.]
Sometimes, too, when their spiritual masters, such as confessors and superiors, do not approve of their spirit and behavior (for they are anxious that all they do shall be esteemed and praised), they consider that they do not understand them, or that, because they do not approve of this and comply with that, their confessors are themselves not spiritual. And so they immediately desire and contrive to find some one else who will fit in with their tastes; for as a rule they desire to speak of spiritual matters with those who they think will praise and esteem what they do, and they flee, as they would from death, from those who disabuse them in order to lead them into a safe road--sometimes they even harbour ill-will against them.
Presuming thus, they are wont to resolve much and accomplish very little. Sometimes they are anxious that others shall realize how spiritual and devout they are, to which end they occasionally give outward evidence thereof in movements, sighs and other ceremonies; and at times they are apt to fall into certain ecstasies, in public rather than in secret, wherein the devil aids them, and they are pleased that this should be noticed, and are often eager that it should be noticed more.
Many such persons desire to be the favourites of their confessors and to become intimate with them, as a result of which there beset them continual occasions of a thousand envies and disquietudes. They are too much embarrassed to confess their sins nakedly, lest their confessors should think less of them, so they palliate them and make them appear less evil, and thus it is to excuse themselves rather than to accuse themselves that they go to confession.
And sometimes they seek another confessor to tell the wrongs that they have done, so that their own confessor shall think they have done nothing wrong at all, but only good; and thus they always take pleasure in telling him what is good, and sometimes in such terms as make it appear to be greater than it is rather than less, desiring that he may think them to be good, when it would be greater humility in them, as we shall say, to depreciate it, and to desire that neither he nor anyone else should consider them of account.
Some of these beginners, too, make little of their faults, and at other times become over-sad when they see themselves fall into them, thinking themselves to have been saints already; and thus they become angry and impatient with themselves, which is another imperfection.
[Though he has gotten past what is noted in the paragraph that follows it, in all honesty, the above paragraph outlines probably the most ingrained faults of the author of this weblog in the area of spiritual pride. In light of pointing out tendencies that afflict people of certain outlooks, it only seems proper to note this not only for the sake of fairness but also to remind this writer of his own problems in this area. -ISM]
Often they beseech God, with great yearnings, that He will take from them their imperfections and faults, but they do this that they may find themselves at peace, and may not be troubled by them, rather than for God's sake; not realizing that, if He should take their imperfections from them, they would probably become prouder and more presumptuous still. They dislike praising others and love to be praised themselves; sometimes they seek out such praise. Herein they are like the foolish virgins, who, when their lamps could not be lit, sought oil from others.[St. Matthew xxv, 8.]
From these imperfections some souls go on to develop many very grave ones, which do them great harm. But some have fewer and some more, and some, only the first motions thereof or little beyond these; and there are hardly any such beginners who, at the time of these signs of fervour, fall not into some of these errors. But those who at this time are going on to perfection proceed very differently and with quite another temper of spirit; for they progress by means of humility and are greatly edified, not only thinking naught of their own affairs, but having very little satisfaction with themselves; they consider all others as far better, and usually have a holy envy of them, and an eagerness to serve God as they do.
For the greater is their fervour, and the more numerous are the works that they perform, and the greater is the pleasure that they take in them, as they progress in humility, the more do they realize how much God deserves of them, and how little is all that they do for His sake; and thus, the more they do, the less are they satisfied. So much would they gladly do from charity and love for Him, that all they do seems to them naught; and so greatly are they importuned, occupied and absorbed by this loving anxiety that they never notice what others do or do not; or if they do notice it, they always believe, as I say, that all others are far better than they themselves.
Wherefore, holding themselves as of little worth, they are anxious that others too should thus hold them, and should despise and depreciate that which they do. And further, if men should praise and esteem them, they can in no wise believe what they say; it seems to them strange that anyone should say these good things of them.
Together with great tranquillity and humbleness, these souls have a deep desire to be taught by anyone who can bring them profit; they are the complete opposite of those of whom we have spoken above, who would fain be always teaching, and who, when others seem to be teaching them, take the words from their mouths as if they knew them already.
These souls, on the other hand, being far from desiring to be the masters of any, are very ready to travel and set out on another road than that which they are actually following, if they be so commanded, because they never think that they are right in anything whatsoever. They rejoice when others are praised; they grieve only because they serve not God like them. They have no desire to speak of the things that they do, because they think so little of them that they are ashamed to speak of them even to their spiritual masters, since they seem to them to be things that merit not being spoken of.
They are more anxious to speak of their faults and sins, or that these should be recognized rather than their virtues; and thus they incline to talk of their souls with those who account their actions and their spirituality of little value. This is a characteristic of the spirit which is simple, pure, genuine and very pleasing to God. For as the wise Spirit of God dwells in these humble souls, He moves them and inclines them to keep His treasures secretly within and likewise to cast out from themselves all evil. God gives this grace to the humble, together with the other virtues, even as He denies it to the proud.
These souls will give their heart's blood to anyone that serves God, and will help others to serve Him as much as in them lies. The imperfections into which they see themselves fall they bear with humility, meekness of spirit and a loving fear of God, hoping in Him.
But souls who in the beginning journey with this kind of perfection are, as I understand, and as has been said, a minority, and very few are those who we can be glad do not fall into the opposite errors. For this reason, as we shall afterwards say, God leads into the dark night those whom He desires to purify from all these imperfections so that He may bring them farther onward.
To be Continued...
(Aka "the Rerum Novarum 2004 Lenten Spiritual Instruction")
The previous installment of this series can be read HERE. To start from the beginning of this series, please go HERE.
CHAPTER II
Of certain spiritual imperfections which beginners have with respect to the habit of pride.
[Though there is something in this section that applies to all of us; the next six paragraphs -either all or in part- apply in particular to many if not most of those who take the position of being "more 'traditional' than thou." -ISM]
AS these beginners feel themselves to be very fervent and diligent in spiritual things and devout exercises, from this prosperity (although it is true that holy things of their own nature cause humility) there often comes to them, through their imperfections, a certain kind of secret pride, whence they come to have some degree of satisfaction with their works and with themselves. And hence there comes to them likewise a certain desire, which is somewhat vain, and at times very vain, to speak of spiritual things in the presence of others, and sometimes even to teach such things rather than to learn them.
They condemn others in their heart when they see that they have not the kind of devotion which they themselves desire; and sometimes they even say this in words, herein resembling the Pharisee, who boasted of himself, praising God for his own good works and despising the publican.[St. Luke xviii, 11-12.]
In these persons the devil often increases the fervour that they have and the desire to perform these and other works more frequently, so that their pride and presumption may grow greater. For the devil knows quite well that all these works and virtues which they perform are not only valueless to them, but even become vices in them.
And such a degree of evil are some of these persons wont to reach that they would have none appear good save themselves; and thus, in deed and word, whenever the opportunity occurs, they condemn them and slander them, beholding the mote in their brother's eye and not considering the beam which is in their own;[St. Matthew vii, 3.] they strain at another's gnat and themselves swallow a camel.[St. Matthew xxiii, 24.]
Sometimes, too, when their spiritual masters, such as confessors and superiors, do not approve of their spirit and behavior (for they are anxious that all they do shall be esteemed and praised), they consider that they do not understand them, or that, because they do not approve of this and comply with that, their confessors are themselves not spiritual. And so they immediately desire and contrive to find some one else who will fit in with their tastes; for as a rule they desire to speak of spiritual matters with those who they think will praise and esteem what they do, and they flee, as they would from death, from those who disabuse them in order to lead them into a safe road--sometimes they even harbour ill-will against them.
Presuming thus, they are wont to resolve much and accomplish very little. Sometimes they are anxious that others shall realize how spiritual and devout they are, to which end they occasionally give outward evidence thereof in movements, sighs and other ceremonies; and at times they are apt to fall into certain ecstasies, in public rather than in secret, wherein the devil aids them, and they are pleased that this should be noticed, and are often eager that it should be noticed more.
Many such persons desire to be the favourites of their confessors and to become intimate with them, as a result of which there beset them continual occasions of a thousand envies and disquietudes. They are too much embarrassed to confess their sins nakedly, lest their confessors should think less of them, so they palliate them and make them appear less evil, and thus it is to excuse themselves rather than to accuse themselves that they go to confession.
And sometimes they seek another confessor to tell the wrongs that they have done, so that their own confessor shall think they have done nothing wrong at all, but only good; and thus they always take pleasure in telling him what is good, and sometimes in such terms as make it appear to be greater than it is rather than less, desiring that he may think them to be good, when it would be greater humility in them, as we shall say, to depreciate it, and to desire that neither he nor anyone else should consider them of account.
Some of these beginners, too, make little of their faults, and at other times become over-sad when they see themselves fall into them, thinking themselves to have been saints already; and thus they become angry and impatient with themselves, which is another imperfection.
[Though he has gotten past what is noted in the paragraph that follows it, in all honesty, the above paragraph outlines probably the most ingrained faults of the author of this weblog in the area of spiritual pride. In light of pointing out tendencies that afflict people of certain outlooks, it only seems proper to note this not only for the sake of fairness but also to remind this writer of his own problems in this area. -ISM]
Often they beseech God, with great yearnings, that He will take from them their imperfections and faults, but they do this that they may find themselves at peace, and may not be troubled by them, rather than for God's sake; not realizing that, if He should take their imperfections from them, they would probably become prouder and more presumptuous still. They dislike praising others and love to be praised themselves; sometimes they seek out such praise. Herein they are like the foolish virgins, who, when their lamps could not be lit, sought oil from others.[St. Matthew xxv, 8.]
From these imperfections some souls go on to develop many very grave ones, which do them great harm. But some have fewer and some more, and some, only the first motions thereof or little beyond these; and there are hardly any such beginners who, at the time of these signs of fervour, fall not into some of these errors. But those who at this time are going on to perfection proceed very differently and with quite another temper of spirit; for they progress by means of humility and are greatly edified, not only thinking naught of their own affairs, but having very little satisfaction with themselves; they consider all others as far better, and usually have a holy envy of them, and an eagerness to serve God as they do.
For the greater is their fervour, and the more numerous are the works that they perform, and the greater is the pleasure that they take in them, as they progress in humility, the more do they realize how much God deserves of them, and how little is all that they do for His sake; and thus, the more they do, the less are they satisfied. So much would they gladly do from charity and love for Him, that all they do seems to them naught; and so greatly are they importuned, occupied and absorbed by this loving anxiety that they never notice what others do or do not; or if they do notice it, they always believe, as I say, that all others are far better than they themselves.
Wherefore, holding themselves as of little worth, they are anxious that others too should thus hold them, and should despise and depreciate that which they do. And further, if men should praise and esteem them, they can in no wise believe what they say; it seems to them strange that anyone should say these good things of them.
Together with great tranquillity and humbleness, these souls have a deep desire to be taught by anyone who can bring them profit; they are the complete opposite of those of whom we have spoken above, who would fain be always teaching, and who, when others seem to be teaching them, take the words from their mouths as if they knew them already.
These souls, on the other hand, being far from desiring to be the masters of any, are very ready to travel and set out on another road than that which they are actually following, if they be so commanded, because they never think that they are right in anything whatsoever. They rejoice when others are praised; they grieve only because they serve not God like them. They have no desire to speak of the things that they do, because they think so little of them that they are ashamed to speak of them even to their spiritual masters, since they seem to them to be things that merit not being spoken of.
They are more anxious to speak of their faults and sins, or that these should be recognized rather than their virtues; and thus they incline to talk of their souls with those who account their actions and their spirituality of little value. This is a characteristic of the spirit which is simple, pure, genuine and very pleasing to God. For as the wise Spirit of God dwells in these humble souls, He moves them and inclines them to keep His treasures secretly within and likewise to cast out from themselves all evil. God gives this grace to the humble, together with the other virtues, even as He denies it to the proud.
These souls will give their heart's blood to anyone that serves God, and will help others to serve Him as much as in them lies. The imperfections into which they see themselves fall they bear with humility, meekness of spirit and a loving fear of God, hoping in Him.
But souls who in the beginning journey with this kind of perfection are, as I understand, and as has been said, a minority, and very few are those who we can be glad do not fall into the opposite errors. For this reason, as we shall afterwards say, God leads into the dark night those whom He desires to purify from all these imperfections so that He may bring them farther onward.
To be Continued...
Thursday, March 04, 2004
Like a lot of bloggers, I do my share of what is called blegging but not for donations of gold or silver. Instead, at different times of the year I request from my readers of good will prayers for departed family and friends. As today would have been my father's 63rd birthday, I would like to request prayers for the eternal repose of his soul. See this entry from last year for more details. Thankyou in advance for your generosity in this endeavour.
Wednesday, March 03, 2004
Rerum Novarum Weblog Addition and an Adjustment:
Essentially I have added Greg Mockeridge's new weblog Musings of the Armchair Theologian and also corrected the link to my essay The 'Tradition is Opposed to Novelty' Canard which accidentally was going to a piece Matt1618 did on the Roman Canon contra the same David Palm. (The difference in the two essay urls was one letter, hence the confusion.) These adjustments and additions have been made in perpetuity all things to the contrary notwithstanding.
Essentially I have added Greg Mockeridge's new weblog Musings of the Armchair Theologian and also corrected the link to my essay The 'Tradition is Opposed to Novelty' Canard which accidentally was going to a piece Matt1618 did on the Roman Canon contra the same David Palm. (The difference in the two essay urls was one letter, hence the confusion.) These adjustments and additions have been made in perpetuity all things to the contrary notwithstanding.
More on Intincture and the Common Good:
Can a parish priest initiate that on his own, without the bishop's approval, Shawn?
You know, I am really not sure to be honest. I cannot imagine a local ordinary who approves of communion under both forms possibly objecting to it. Or should I say, I cannot imagine a local ordinary who approves of communion under both forms possibly objecting to it if it is presented to them properly.
Agreed. Yet, the reason I ask is because intincture isn't **really** part of the Roman Rite, but a regional "borrowing" from the Byzantine Rite. ...Not that there's anything wrong with that (it's how Rites are supposed to develop).
Indeed. As I note in my essay response to David Palm, "every change in precedent represents a novelty at some point." No novelty should be accepted simply because it is a novelty. Likewise, no practice should be retained simply because it was done for a long period of time. There should be an aim towards legitimate improvement over existing practice if a change is to be made.
I submit that intincture in light of what is commonly done today represents such an improvement. And in true ressourcement fashion, rather than improvise from scratch, I am recommending something from the wellspring of the Great Tradition here. (As you well know.)
But, then again, it seems that almost "anything goes" in the Roman Rites these days, so why worry about exceptions? ;-)
Sad but true. I think a good argument can be made that the mummified nature of disciplines and praxis was in need of serious smashing by the mid twentieth century if we were to properly understand the diversity that authentic catholicity should manifest. However, that point having been done -in legitimate and illegitimate ways alas- the time has come after a generation to take an honest look at what needs to be rectified at this point. And communion reception is an area where a lot of things need tending to.
I believe intincture is a good first step in this direction as (i) it has precedent in the Great Tradition and (ii) it solves at least five problems at once.{1} Hence, we need to promote it to our ordinaries as the way communion is administered in the Churches of the Latin rite. I see no good arguments against this proposal though of course I am more than willing to listen to other options. But I honestly doubt I will be swayed on this one iota.
Oh and one more thing: I can understand and appreciate the argument that it is more expedient to administer communion standing as opposed to kneeling. For that reason, along with intincture should be accompanied by either genuflection or a profound bow before reception. I opt for the profound bow myself but would have no objection to genuflection if the ordinary decided that that was what was to be done.
Sure, the SSPX (and friends) are wackos, but we really do need to do something about our Liturgy.
Agreed.
In the vast majority of places, this is not what the Novus Ordo was intended to be.
True. The solution therefore should come first and foremost from the Great Tradition and not from innovating for the sake of innovation.
Yet, so many Catholics (including Catholic **bishops** at this point!!) simply don't have a clue. Most Catholics have no Liturgical sensitivity anymore.
Agreed. And while you and I disagree on certain points (such as monarchy versus republican government), I doubt there are any disagreements between us on how this is to be conducted except perhaps in application.
For example, and I know this will grate on XXXX, but I believe we need to find a solid foundation to erode the practice of altar girls. And that is perhaps best done by starting with the emphasis that Fr. Stravinskas makes that there is no "more" or "less" actual participation in the liturgy by those who serve the liturgy.
For as long as the myth sustains itself that somehow those who serve the altar are participating more or less than others rather than participating equally except in different capacities -the role of the ordained excepted of course- there will be little in the way of persuasion against the practice.{2} However, if we can recognize somehow that this development while not ruling out the possibility of altar girls nonetheless serves to diminish the number of boys who want to serve the altar, that is the best approach in my view to take.
For as Catholics we must be ever so sensitive to not only issues such as public order but also the common good. I see nothing in altar girls that meets both of these criteria if you will -particularly the common good which is harmed when service at the altar is not restricted to boys. Our concern for the common good and the use of the altar server function one "training ground" for future priests needs to take precedent over "self-esteem" issues of girls serving the altar. They can be ushers, sing in the choir, even lectors and that is not in my view the slightest bit problematical.{3}
In summary, we should be emphasizing this all from the standpoint of both public order and also common good. In doing this, we should make it clear that girls who forego serving at the altar actually participate in improving the overall common good of the Church for reasons I already outlined. But as I have probably again stirred the hornets nest, that is all I will say on it at this time.
Notes:
{1} Go HERE to see the five reasons alluded to in this post outlined in brief.
{2} Particularly since Vatican II declared the clear separation between those with orders and those without.
{3} Indeed lector by its very nature is properly seen today as a lay function that would of course admit of women serving as lector.
Can a parish priest initiate that on his own, without the bishop's approval, Shawn?
You know, I am really not sure to be honest. I cannot imagine a local ordinary who approves of communion under both forms possibly objecting to it. Or should I say, I cannot imagine a local ordinary who approves of communion under both forms possibly objecting to it if it is presented to them properly.
Agreed. Yet, the reason I ask is because intincture isn't **really** part of the Roman Rite, but a regional "borrowing" from the Byzantine Rite. ...Not that there's anything wrong with that (it's how Rites are supposed to develop).
Indeed. As I note in my essay response to David Palm, "every change in precedent represents a novelty at some point." No novelty should be accepted simply because it is a novelty. Likewise, no practice should be retained simply because it was done for a long period of time. There should be an aim towards legitimate improvement over existing practice if a change is to be made.
I submit that intincture in light of what is commonly done today represents such an improvement. And in true ressourcement fashion, rather than improvise from scratch, I am recommending something from the wellspring of the Great Tradition here. (As you well know.)
But, then again, it seems that almost "anything goes" in the Roman Rites these days, so why worry about exceptions? ;-)
Sad but true. I think a good argument can be made that the mummified nature of disciplines and praxis was in need of serious smashing by the mid twentieth century if we were to properly understand the diversity that authentic catholicity should manifest. However, that point having been done -in legitimate and illegitimate ways alas- the time has come after a generation to take an honest look at what needs to be rectified at this point. And communion reception is an area where a lot of things need tending to.
I believe intincture is a good first step in this direction as (i) it has precedent in the Great Tradition and (ii) it solves at least five problems at once.{1} Hence, we need to promote it to our ordinaries as the way communion is administered in the Churches of the Latin rite. I see no good arguments against this proposal though of course I am more than willing to listen to other options. But I honestly doubt I will be swayed on this one iota.
Oh and one more thing: I can understand and appreciate the argument that it is more expedient to administer communion standing as opposed to kneeling. For that reason, along with intincture should be accompanied by either genuflection or a profound bow before reception. I opt for the profound bow myself but would have no objection to genuflection if the ordinary decided that that was what was to be done.
Sure, the SSPX (and friends) are wackos, but we really do need to do something about our Liturgy.
Agreed.
In the vast majority of places, this is not what the Novus Ordo was intended to be.
True. The solution therefore should come first and foremost from the Great Tradition and not from innovating for the sake of innovation.
Yet, so many Catholics (including Catholic **bishops** at this point!!) simply don't have a clue. Most Catholics have no Liturgical sensitivity anymore.
Agreed. And while you and I disagree on certain points (such as monarchy versus republican government), I doubt there are any disagreements between us on how this is to be conducted except perhaps in application.
For example, and I know this will grate on XXXX, but I believe we need to find a solid foundation to erode the practice of altar girls. And that is perhaps best done by starting with the emphasis that Fr. Stravinskas makes that there is no "more" or "less" actual participation in the liturgy by those who serve the liturgy.
For as long as the myth sustains itself that somehow those who serve the altar are participating more or less than others rather than participating equally except in different capacities -the role of the ordained excepted of course- there will be little in the way of persuasion against the practice.{2} However, if we can recognize somehow that this development while not ruling out the possibility of altar girls nonetheless serves to diminish the number of boys who want to serve the altar, that is the best approach in my view to take.
For as Catholics we must be ever so sensitive to not only issues such as public order but also the common good. I see nothing in altar girls that meets both of these criteria if you will -particularly the common good which is harmed when service at the altar is not restricted to boys. Our concern for the common good and the use of the altar server function one "training ground" for future priests needs to take precedent over "self-esteem" issues of girls serving the altar. They can be ushers, sing in the choir, even lectors and that is not in my view the slightest bit problematical.{3}
In summary, we should be emphasizing this all from the standpoint of both public order and also common good. In doing this, we should make it clear that girls who forego serving at the altar actually participate in improving the overall common good of the Church for reasons I already outlined. But as I have probably again stirred the hornets nest, that is all I will say on it at this time.
Notes:
{1} Go HERE to see the five reasons alluded to in this post outlined in brief.
{2} Particularly since Vatican II declared the clear separation between those with orders and those without.
{3} Indeed lector by its very nature is properly seen today as a lay function that would of course admit of women serving as lector.
Announcing a New Weblog:
It seems that We at Rerum Novarum havebroken down yet another reader encouraged without realizing it another frequent reader of this humble weblog to start their own weblog. This time it was Greg Mockeridge whose weblog can be accessed HERE. It is titled Musings of the Armchair Theologian and it appears to be very ressourcement oriented. That can of course only please this writer greatly since such individuals are very rare to find. In light of this development, it only seems appropriate to muse on this subject a bit and show in a snapshot an example of ressourcement in action.
The subtitle of Greg's new weblog is [a] weblog dedicated to defense of Catholicism and its application to political and socio-economic affairs. In light of what this writer has noted before about that subject, perhaps the reader now sees with greater clarity why the debut of this weblog is so pleasing to Us here at Rerum Novarum.
In other news, the very same Greg Mockeridge, in his capacity as an Inquisitor at Lidless Eye, he has called for an auto da fe on Jacob "U Thant Touch This" Michael and one of the latter's fundamental errors regarding the Catholic faith. It is Our recommendation to give that thread a reading if you at all follow such things as apparitions. Also worth reading are this writer's prefatory comments to a guest editorial on Jacinta's Vision by Fr. Thomas Carleton to the Lidless Eye weblog last year. (Where what was made -with the assistance of the teaching of the eighteenth century Pope Benedict XIV- the key distinction that Jacob misses viz. apparitions.) Anyway, if interested give the latter (along with Fr. Carleton's excellent guest editorial) a read but start with Greg's post first.
It seems that We at Rerum Novarum have
The subtitle of Greg's new weblog is [a] weblog dedicated to defense of Catholicism and its application to political and socio-economic affairs. In light of what this writer has noted before about that subject, perhaps the reader now sees with greater clarity why the debut of this weblog is so pleasing to Us here at Rerum Novarum.
In other news, the very same Greg Mockeridge, in his capacity as an Inquisitor at Lidless Eye, he has called for an auto da fe on Jacob "U Thant Touch This" Michael and one of the latter's fundamental errors regarding the Catholic faith. It is Our recommendation to give that thread a reading if you at all follow such things as apparitions. Also worth reading are this writer's prefatory comments to a guest editorial on Jacinta's Vision by Fr. Thomas Carleton to the Lidless Eye weblog last year. (Where what was made -with the assistance of the teaching of the eighteenth century Pope Benedict XIV- the key distinction that Jacob misses viz. apparitions.) Anyway, if interested give the latter (along with Fr. Carleton's excellent guest editorial) a read but start with Greg's post first.
Meditations on The Dark Night of the Soul:
(Aka "the Rerum Novarum 2004 Lenten Spiritual Instruction")
The previous installment of this series can be read HERE. To start from the beginning of this series, please go HERE.
On a dark night
CHAPTER I
Sets down the first line and begins to treat of the imperfections of beginners.
INTO this dark night souls begin to enter when God draws them forth from the state of beginners--which is the state of those that meditate on the spiritual road--and begins to set them in the state of progressives--which is that of those who are already contemplatives--to the end that, after passing through it, they may arrive at the state of the perfect, which is that of the Divine union of the soul with God. Wherefore, to the end that we may the better understand and explain what night is this through which the soul passes, and for what cause God sets it therein, it will be well here to touch first of all upon certain characteristics of beginners (which, although we treat them with all possible brevity, will not fail to be of service likewise to the beginners themselves), in order that, realizing the weakness of the state wherein they are, they may take courage, and may desire that God will bring them into this night, wherein the soul is strengthened and confirmed in the virtues, and made ready for the inestimable delights of the love of God. And, although we may tarry here for a time, it will not be for longer than is necessary, so that we may go on to speak at once of this dark night.
It must be known, then, that the soul, after it has been definitely converted to the service of God, is, as a rule, spiritually nurtured and caressed by God, even as is the tender child by its loving mother, who warms it with the heat of her bosom and nurtures it with sweet milk and soft and pleasant food, and carries it and caresses it in her arms; but, as the child grows bigger, the mother gradually ceases caressing it, and, hiding her tender love, puts bitter aloes upon her sweet breast, sets down the child from her arms and makes it walk upon its feet, so that it may lose the habits of a child and betake itself to more important and substantial occupations. The loving mother is like the grace of God, for, as soon as the soul is regenerated by its new warmth and fervour for the service of God, He treats it in the same way; He makes it to find spiritual milk, sweet and delectable, in all the things of God, without any labour of its own, and also great pleasure in spiritual exercises, for here God is giving to it the breast of His tender love, even as to a tender child.
Therefore, such a soul finds its delight in spending long periods--perchance whole nights--in prayer; penances are its pleasures; fasts its joys; and its consolations are to make use of the sacraments and to occupy itself in Divine things. In the which things spiritual persons (though taking part in them with great efficacy and persistence and using and treating them with great care) often find themselves, spiritually speaking, very weak and imperfect. For since they are moved to these things and to these spiritual exercises by the consolation and pleasure that they find in them, and since, too, they have not been prepared for them by the practice of earnest striving in the virtues, they have many faults and imperfections with respect to these spiritual actions of theirs; for, after all, any man's actions correspond to the habit of perfection attained by him. And, as these persons have not had the opportunity of acquiring the said habits of strength, they have necessarily to work like feebler children, feebly. In order that this may be seen more clearly, and likewise how much these beginners in the virtues lacks with respect to the works in which they so readily engage with the pleasure aforementioned, we shall describe it by reference to the seven capital sins, each in its turn, indicating some of the many imperfections which they have under each heading; wherein it will be clearly seen how like to children are these persons in all they do. And it will also be seen how many blessings the dark night of which we shall afterwards treat brings with it, since it cleanses the soul and purifies it from all these imperfections.
To be Continued...
(Aka "the Rerum Novarum 2004 Lenten Spiritual Instruction")
The previous installment of this series can be read HERE. To start from the beginning of this series, please go HERE.
On a dark night
CHAPTER I
Sets down the first line and begins to treat of the imperfections of beginners.
INTO this dark night souls begin to enter when God draws them forth from the state of beginners--which is the state of those that meditate on the spiritual road--and begins to set them in the state of progressives--which is that of those who are already contemplatives--to the end that, after passing through it, they may arrive at the state of the perfect, which is that of the Divine union of the soul with God. Wherefore, to the end that we may the better understand and explain what night is this through which the soul passes, and for what cause God sets it therein, it will be well here to touch first of all upon certain characteristics of beginners (which, although we treat them with all possible brevity, will not fail to be of service likewise to the beginners themselves), in order that, realizing the weakness of the state wherein they are, they may take courage, and may desire that God will bring them into this night, wherein the soul is strengthened and confirmed in the virtues, and made ready for the inestimable delights of the love of God. And, although we may tarry here for a time, it will not be for longer than is necessary, so that we may go on to speak at once of this dark night.
It must be known, then, that the soul, after it has been definitely converted to the service of God, is, as a rule, spiritually nurtured and caressed by God, even as is the tender child by its loving mother, who warms it with the heat of her bosom and nurtures it with sweet milk and soft and pleasant food, and carries it and caresses it in her arms; but, as the child grows bigger, the mother gradually ceases caressing it, and, hiding her tender love, puts bitter aloes upon her sweet breast, sets down the child from her arms and makes it walk upon its feet, so that it may lose the habits of a child and betake itself to more important and substantial occupations. The loving mother is like the grace of God, for, as soon as the soul is regenerated by its new warmth and fervour for the service of God, He treats it in the same way; He makes it to find spiritual milk, sweet and delectable, in all the things of God, without any labour of its own, and also great pleasure in spiritual exercises, for here God is giving to it the breast of His tender love, even as to a tender child.
Therefore, such a soul finds its delight in spending long periods--perchance whole nights--in prayer; penances are its pleasures; fasts its joys; and its consolations are to make use of the sacraments and to occupy itself in Divine things. In the which things spiritual persons (though taking part in them with great efficacy and persistence and using and treating them with great care) often find themselves, spiritually speaking, very weak and imperfect. For since they are moved to these things and to these spiritual exercises by the consolation and pleasure that they find in them, and since, too, they have not been prepared for them by the practice of earnest striving in the virtues, they have many faults and imperfections with respect to these spiritual actions of theirs; for, after all, any man's actions correspond to the habit of perfection attained by him. And, as these persons have not had the opportunity of acquiring the said habits of strength, they have necessarily to work like feebler children, feebly. In order that this may be seen more clearly, and likewise how much these beginners in the virtues lacks with respect to the works in which they so readily engage with the pleasure aforementioned, we shall describe it by reference to the seven capital sins, each in its turn, indicating some of the many imperfections which they have under each heading; wherein it will be clearly seen how like to children are these persons in all they do. And it will also be seen how many blessings the dark night of which we shall afterwards treat brings with it, since it cleanses the soul and purifies it from all these imperfections.
To be Continued...
Tuesday, March 02, 2004
On Ressourcement Methodology:
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
To start with, ressourcement minded people have a great respect for the traditions and revealed truths of the past. However, they differ from a so-called "traditionalist" in that they are beholden to the past but not enslaved by it. Likewise, ressourcement minded people strive to have awareness of newer developments and properly discern how they can contribute to a refinement of the present. However, they differ from so-called "progressivists" in that while they are aware of the opportunities and developments of the present, they are not striving to put such things in controversion with the traditions handed on to them. They are in other words not "people of their own time" though they of course live in their own time. They are not slaves to technology or new ideas but see these as tools to serve the greater good if you will.
Much more could be noted on this but at the same time, much already has been noted at this weblog or its affiliates. And so in true ressourcement fashion, We will now quote from something added to the Rerum Novarum Miscellaneous BLOG about nine months ago on this very same theme. In a post about the definition of a conservative, the authentic understanding of "conservatism" was set out. (As opposed to the fraudulent understandings of that term so commonly utilized over the past several decades.) We defined the term "conservatism" as follows:
Conservatism: An integrated philosophy encompassing religious, political, and social tenents which seeks to find ways of fruitfully applying the wisdom, experience, and revealed truths of the past to the problems of the contemporary world.
The term "conservative" was defined along the same lines as "conservatism":
Conservative: Someone who advocates an integrated philosophy of seeking to find ways of fruitfully applying the wisdom, experience, and revealed truths of the past to the problems of the contemporary world - be they of a religious, political, or social nature.
Essentially this weblog and its affiliates use the term ressourcement as synonymous with true and authentic "conservatism." This is done because the latter term in the modern vernacular has been so bastardized, caricatured, and dichotomized that it makes such distinctions necessary.
(Musings of your humble servant at Rerum Novarum)
To start with, ressourcement minded people have a great respect for the traditions and revealed truths of the past. However, they differ from a so-called "traditionalist" in that they are beholden to the past but not enslaved by it. Likewise, ressourcement minded people strive to have awareness of newer developments and properly discern how they can contribute to a refinement of the present. However, they differ from so-called "progressivists" in that while they are aware of the opportunities and developments of the present, they are not striving to put such things in controversion with the traditions handed on to them. They are in other words not "people of their own time" though they of course live in their own time. They are not slaves to technology or new ideas but see these as tools to serve the greater good if you will.
Much more could be noted on this but at the same time, much already has been noted at this weblog or its affiliates. And so in true ressourcement fashion, We will now quote from something added to the Rerum Novarum Miscellaneous BLOG about nine months ago on this very same theme. In a post about the definition of a conservative, the authentic understanding of "conservatism" was set out. (As opposed to the fraudulent understandings of that term so commonly utilized over the past several decades.) We defined the term "conservatism" as follows:
Conservatism: An integrated philosophy encompassing religious, political, and social tenents which seeks to find ways of fruitfully applying the wisdom, experience, and revealed truths of the past to the problems of the contemporary world.
The term "conservative" was defined along the same lines as "conservatism":
Conservative: Someone who advocates an integrated philosophy of seeking to find ways of fruitfully applying the wisdom, experience, and revealed truths of the past to the problems of the contemporary world - be they of a religious, political, or social nature.
Essentially this weblog and its affiliates use the term ressourcement as synonymous with true and authentic "conservatism." This is done because the latter term in the modern vernacular has been so bastardized, caricatured, and dichotomized that it makes such distinctions necessary.
Briefly on The Passion of the Christ
Have you seen The Passion yet?
No but I intend to see it during Lent.
I got back from seeing it. Well done. It has a few inaccuracies, like Jesus conversing with Pilate in Latin (that could Mel's partisanship toward traddism coming out).
Perhaps. I do not expect 100% accuracy from any movie dealing with historical people and situations so this does not bother me.
The most common possible scenarios, from what I've heard, was either they conversed in Greek, since Greek was the commercial language and both Pilate as provincial governor and Jesus, as carpenter could very well have understood Greek or that they conversed with the help of an interpreter.
I am inclined towards that understanding myself. Greek was the vernacular of the Empire at the time. Latin was only to start displacing it in the third century AD. In Our Lord's time, Greek is with the highest probability what a Jew and a Gentile conversing together would speak in.
Also, I found it odd that he didn't have Longinus the Centurion say the famous line "Truly, this is the Son of God" after lancing His side with the spear.
The ambiguous nature of the phrase "Son of God" in that time period would have been maintained if a Jew had said the phrase but a Gentile like the Centurion saying it would have one interpretation in mind. My guess is that it was probably left out for ecumenical reasons -which in light of what Mel has been subjected to is understandable.
Lest people find this comment troubling, allow me to note here that if non-Christians did not already know what Christians believe about Jesus of Nazareth, that would be problematical indeed. But as they generally do know this already, I do not find it troubling at all.{1} Besides, there are four Gospels to draw from. Your reference is if memory serves from two of the Synoptics (Matthew and Mark). Mel's main text was the Gospel of John{2} where the phrase is not noted.
In any event, it was a good movie.
That is the consensus I have heard. And that it has the second highest total gross in its first five days in the theatres in history{3} is a welcome addition as well. It really shows how out of touch the so-called "experts" are about the audience for this kind of film.
And may Mel Gibson become the richest man in Hollywood because of it, if for no other reason than to tweek the Hollyweird elites.
Amen!!! Seek ye first the kingdom of God and the rest shall be given to you so to speak. Mel did this with his own money and probably sacrificed his vocation for the sake of this film. May he therefore make a bundle and be able to provide well for his family and their families to the fourth generationif not beyond.
Notes:
{1} If anything its inclusion could be chalked up to being rather pedantic.
{2} This is not to say that he did not fill from the Synoptics of course -a point I made when criticizing a certain Catholic critic's criticisms last year.
{3} Only Return of the King from the Lord of the Rings trilogy had a higher first five day gross than The Passion of the Christ.
Have you seen The Passion yet?
No but I intend to see it during Lent.
I got back from seeing it. Well done. It has a few inaccuracies, like Jesus conversing with Pilate in Latin (that could Mel's partisanship toward traddism coming out).
Perhaps. I do not expect 100% accuracy from any movie dealing with historical people and situations so this does not bother me.
The most common possible scenarios, from what I've heard, was either they conversed in Greek, since Greek was the commercial language and both Pilate as provincial governor and Jesus, as carpenter could very well have understood Greek or that they conversed with the help of an interpreter.
I am inclined towards that understanding myself. Greek was the vernacular of the Empire at the time. Latin was only to start displacing it in the third century AD. In Our Lord's time, Greek is with the highest probability what a Jew and a Gentile conversing together would speak in.
Also, I found it odd that he didn't have Longinus the Centurion say the famous line "Truly, this is the Son of God" after lancing His side with the spear.
The ambiguous nature of the phrase "Son of God" in that time period would have been maintained if a Jew had said the phrase but a Gentile like the Centurion saying it would have one interpretation in mind. My guess is that it was probably left out for ecumenical reasons -which in light of what Mel has been subjected to is understandable.
Lest people find this comment troubling, allow me to note here that if non-Christians did not already know what Christians believe about Jesus of Nazareth, that would be problematical indeed. But as they generally do know this already, I do not find it troubling at all.{1} Besides, there are four Gospels to draw from. Your reference is if memory serves from two of the Synoptics (Matthew and Mark). Mel's main text was the Gospel of John{2} where the phrase is not noted.
In any event, it was a good movie.
That is the consensus I have heard. And that it has the second highest total gross in its first five days in the theatres in history{3} is a welcome addition as well. It really shows how out of touch the so-called "experts" are about the audience for this kind of film.
And may Mel Gibson become the richest man in Hollywood because of it, if for no other reason than to tweek the Hollyweird elites.
Amen!!! Seek ye first the kingdom of God and the rest shall be given to you so to speak. Mel did this with his own money and probably sacrificed his vocation for the sake of this film. May he therefore make a bundle and be able to provide well for his family and their families to the fourth generationif not beyond.
Notes:
{1} If anything its inclusion could be chalked up to being rather pedantic.
{2} This is not to say that he did not fill from the Synoptics of course -a point I made when criticizing a certain Catholic critic's criticisms last year.
{3} Only Return of the King from the Lord of the Rings trilogy had a higher first five day gross than The Passion of the Christ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)