"versus populum codependency"

A comment on my post Oriented towards the Goal used the expression "versus populum codependency" as an explanation for the resistance of priests or bishops to opting for the ad Orientem celebration of the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite. Personally, I think that "fear of the unknown" is closer to the reality. In America generally, you have to be at least age 60 or older, like me, to have any clear recollections of ad Orientem as the norm for worship. The other option is to have the great fortune to be of the Summorum Pontificum generation, which means you are young, young. I don't really think that codependency is a good general fit anywhere.

"Codependency" presumes something on the part of the worshiping community which no one can prove to me is either universal or even that general. Like my dear sister, commenting on Facebook, said about this same post: "Maybe it's my old age, but it makes no difference to me which way the priest faces." I think she represents the more general sentiment among the faithful, which would disqualify the "co-". If there is resistance on the part of the congregation, it would be resistance to more gratuitous change or innovation. We owe it to our people to behave better in their regard than did our forebears in the 1970's.

Without wishing to exaggerate too much, what is needed is something short of a Pentecost conversion in response to the preaching of St. Peter (Acts 2:37-42):

"37 Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and to the other apostles, “Brothers, what should we do?” 38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven ; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you , for your children, and for all who are far away, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to him.” 40 And he testified with many other arguments and exhorted them , saying, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41 So those who welcomed his message were baptized, and that day about three thousand persons were added. 42 They devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers." [Harper Bibles (2011-11-15). NRSV Catholic Edition Bible (Kindle Locations 63584-63590). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.]

As strange as it may seem, my own "conversion" was in response to the teaching on the liturgy of Pope Benedict XVI. I can control my own environment (being the boss and generally celebrating in my own chapel) and I have adjusted the altars in both places and could do so at no extraordinary cost, in both settings and for somewhat different reasons. Not all priests have that freedom, nor can they undertake big changes unilaterally.

I have found ad Orientem always rewarding for me as a celebrating priest. I can attest that my little daily Mass crowd in Port of Spain, Trinidad, found it a liberating and consoling option for them. Here in Kyiv, in a Byzantine context, it is the most natural thing in the world for my Greek-Catholic Sisters. The ad Orientem celebration of the OF immediately puts in evidence much which the Roman Rite and the Divine Liturgy of St. John Chrysostom share in common.

And the EF you ask? Excellency, when are you going to come home to the tradition? The simple answer is that I cannot say, as I do not know what, other than training and some issues with the old calendar, is holding me back. My interlocutor from the previous post would certainly recommend a workshop and perhaps even find me a tutor. I'm reading Dobszay's earlier book for enlightenment on the calendar issue. As I say, we needs do or abstain from anything to avoid the scandal of a repeated aggression like the iconoclasm of the 1970's. How best to promote Benedict's agenda of growing into the future through mutual enrichment? For now I'll hold my ground and continue to insist on the urgency of recovering the proper orientation in Divine Worship. I still have found no one more convincing than Dobszay in terms of the choice which stands before us. He represents a body of scholarship and scholars which have convinced me that the future of the Roman Rite, its healthy and organic development, depends on finding that reset point which is more of a restoration than a reform of the reform.

I'll keep reading and praying, waiting for or preparing the way for the supreme legislator capable of binding all us "Romans" together and saying with authority "This is the path. Follow it!" In the meantime, to repeat myself for the umpteenth time, beyond restoring a sense of the sacred to our worship through genuinely sacred music and slowing down the Communion procession and giving it the decorum which a Communion rail readily provides, I'll keep recommending proper orientation.

PROPERANTES ADVENTUM DIEI DEI

Oriented Towards the Goal

This year's anniversary for Summorum Pontificum has generated an awful lot of what is upbeat sentiment or commentary in a serene and, for the first time generally, non-defiant kind of way. I am terribly happy about this sensation which is abroad, because it offers hope that, when the time comes, we might avoid sinking into a liturgy war in reprisal for the iconoclastic violence suffered at times over the last half century. Pope Benedict's thesis about mutual enrichment of the two forms of the one rite, can, has, and will bear fruit unto reconciliation and growth (and sooner, I am confident, than later).

While some might be miffed at my choice of words, my point is that these blogposts seem, more than in years before, to radiate confidence and a well-founded expectancy concerning the future; they simply marvel at the fact that the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite (especially as a daily Low Mass) has come out of the catacombs and done so, at least in the Basilica of St. Peter in Rome, in such a natural fashion. As one example, Father Christopher Smith of The Chant Café waxes quite "European" (less than pragmatic) and analytic in reflecting upon what has happened or where we are today: his 2 July Article is more descriptive and the 5 July Article more "European" if you will. Neither ascribes to the thesis of an elderly friend of mine from Paris who, at some point in our countless and heated discussions, would always dismiss me with the quip that the EF was just the last bastion of the monarchist crowd (not my thesis obviously).

More to the point than my desire to laud the efforts of Fr. Smith would be my concern to foster the cause of mutual enrichment and maybe defend Pope Benedict from the accusation of liturgical pluralism, as intending something quite different from my pre-Conciliar altarboy anxieties at seeing a visiting Dominican in the sacristy waiting to celebrate Mass with that preparation of the chalice at the beginning which would invariably keep me off-balance right through the prayer to St. Michael the Archangel. For as long as it takes, there can be no other goal but the recovery of the continuity of our Liturgical Tradition as the sine qua non for the organic development of living liturgy, as it has been always and everywhere.

Despite the rosiness of this scene, however, I must admit that I am plagued by the urgency of moving beyond or faster (without violence) than what Fr. Z. has wisely promoted on many fronts as a "brick by brick" recovery. Only the recovery (always and everywhere) of "orientation", of our liturgical east, will enable us to set forward the process of mutual enrichment. Fully aware as I am that the Ordinary Form of the Mass can be legitimately celebrated with the celebrant on one side of the altar and the people on the other, I can see the wisdom of nudging a few priests and bishops to move beyond "licit" to what is better and recover that which was from the beginning and which has never ceased to be in the Byzantine tradition. Ad Orientem: we pray together facing Christ, the Dawn from on High, Who comes to save us.

My own blogging record would have to read as an option for "try it you'll like it". I've generally cringed at restoring proper orientation by legislative fiat, but I am beginning to see that the orientation question may be for many priests and bishops a harder nut to crack than fostering truly sacred music or adding decorum to the Communion procession by restoring the Communion rail. I do not understand why there is so much resistance, but there is. Perhaps it would be as simple as offering a presbyterate a concrete workshop on the ars celebrandi and giving men the reassurance that while the Toastmaster's Club is right to foster eye contact in public speaking, it is not part of prayer, at least not of the Canon of the Mass and the preparation to receive our Lord in Holy Communion. 

The pushing impatience of the 20th Century liturgical movement has done us untold harm; the error is not to be repeated even for the sake of righting a wrong. Maybe we need just to continue to live in hope, confident in the power for enrichment of good example. Let us entrust this challenge too to the Lord and ask His powerful intervention in fostering proper orientation of priests and bishops when it comes to lifting their hearts to the Lord together with their people.

PROPERANTES ADVENTUM DIEI DEI

No Top Hat; No Dancin' Shoes!

Reading a homily St. Augustine preached on the anniversary of his ordination as a bishop, I came across this quote which impressed me in no small way. It struck me in a manner quite irrelevant to the point the Bishop of Hippo was making, but salutary enough to want to share it:

“…if you remember the poor, because you yourself are also poor, whatever the abundance of your wealth, you are clothed in the rags of the flesh;” [Augustine, Saint; Daniel Doyle, O.S.A.; Edmund Hill, O.P. (2007-01-01). Essential Sermons (p. 391). New City Press. Kindle Edition.]

There was an old expression (Hollywood maybe?) "glad rags", which referred to dress-up clothes. The genius of the expression was indeed to be found in its caprice: nothing transforming, nothing permanent about dress clothes, just something fun to be put on for an occasion and maybe put away again for another such fun time.

I get the impression we don't know so much about "glad rags" any more and perhaps all the money spent on plastic surgery might be an indicator. This is my second summer in Kyiv and I have to say in that regard that the young men I see about town shock me in that regard. How much plastic surgery goes on is irrelevant, but with less clothes on, how much is spent on tanning or otherwise coloring skin, on tattoos, and so on. Here and elsewhere there is something which goes on which is tagged "body sculpting" and all of a sudden, well, "glad rags" just are not enough.

When it comes to worrying about or being preoccupied with outer appearance, not just health, neatness, and presentability, but with an almost ascetically hard won appearance often termed "buff", well, I guess it is time across the centuries for St. Augustine to come to the rescue to tell me and to tell you right in the face: you are clothed in the rags of the flesh. St. Francis of Assisi, pretty boy, left aside his "glad rags" to embrace Lady Poverty and to overcome his fears by kissing that leper who blocked his path. He had it hard, but by the grace of God Who loved him more than the parents who had showered him with material gifts, he attained freedom really in embracing Sister Death.

The "glad rags" and their contemporary equivalents involving "body sculpting", anything which goes beyond athletic training or an exercise regime to foster good health, must be rebuffed with St. Augustine's words: you are clothed in the rags of the flesh. We have here no lasting dwelling place, and as nice a thing as beach season might be, it is all vanity and a chase after the wind (saith Qoheleth).

I wish one and all a happy summer without too many cares and too many second glances in the mirror.

A Glimpse Behind the Veil?

RISU has done us the service of publishing, first in Ukrainian and then in English translation, an article by Oleksandr Sahan, Doctor of Philosophy: "NEW CHALLENGES IN ORTHODOXY IN UKRAINE – WILL THERE BE NEW RESPONSES?" In RISU's own estimation we are dealing with a scholarly analysis of the present state of the Orthodox Church in Ukraine in all its various expressions (he counts three big and many more small ones), and this on the eve of another intense period of church activity, in the midst of a new crisis, which the author contends will determine the next 10-15 years of the Church's development here in Ukraine. Different from most popular discussions, Prof. Sahan speaks only of Orthodoxy, wisely avoiding the inevitable complications which derive when one tries to factor in other Christian groupings. Although this approach lends itself to the sterility of the white coat and laboratory approach, it does cast a glaring light on some issues which are properly Orthodox. In my judgment, Prof. Sahan's sympathies lie with the Kyivan Patriarchate, but apart from this article I have no way of judging whether this is in fact the case.

I put the title "A Glimpse behind the Veil?" on my post as a reflection of my personal dilemma (as the Holy See's man in Kyiv, one without the linguistic skills to be able adequately to follow internal debate in the Ukrainian language on topics of utmost importance) who is most grateful that RISU sees fit to produce English language translations permitting us outsiders further appreciation of what is going on, in my case, around us.

Leaving aside judgments on the overall merit of Prof. Sahan's analysis of the Orthodox situation, I am seeing now for the second time here in recent days terminology describing currents within Orthodoxy in Ukraine, which I find surprising and somewhat disconcerting. He speaks (as seemingly do others) of the Church as having had a "political period" and as being in the midst of or just emerging from an "economic period".

Prof. Sahan, unlike others, seems to think that the struggles of the "political period" are still very much with the Orthodox Church in Ukraine, which is to say that the statutory independence of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church from Moscow is not forever set in stone. The political struggle could once again come to the fore and be decided in favor of a suffragan status of the type which existed under the Soviet Union. In his conclusions the author judges such a development as a negative for the Moscow Patriarchate in Ukraine and a potential gain for other Orthodox groups here not in communion with Moscow.

What he terms as “economic Orthodoxy” or the “theology of business” has very little to do with what has come to be known in the English speaking world as "the prosperity Gospel". Here the material benefits for the high clergy are just that, no pretense being made of promising anything to the simple faithful. While our experience of the Protestant variation on this theme has not been free of moral compromise for the sake of material gain on the part of preachers, as a supposed way of corroborating the "truth" of this Gospel, here it would seem that the higher clergy are simply creating their own gilded cage.

From what little I am able to grasp of such, from the often less than veiled critique of Patriarch Kyrill and those closely allied with him here in Ukraine, I am thoroughly puzzled by Sahan's seemingly sober presentation of self-aggrandizement as something serious, as “economic Orthodoxy” or the “theology of business” (maybe the irony of the original text is not rendered by the English translation).

The popular press, especially in Ukraine, seems more inclined to seek leaders whose behavior corresponds to that of Pope Francis. Canonicity and tradition have a ponderance or weight they do not have in fluid American culture. People here do identify with their Orthodox roots and long for direction and good example from their leaders; they are not inclined to shop in the "market of beliefs". This offers Orthodoxy a truly extraordinary opportunity even yet today to offer a holy and sane alternative to secularism. May the Lord come to the aid of our sister Church and assist her in drawing all to Christ.

UT UNUM SINT

Pre-Baptismal Exorcism, Post-Baptismal Penance

Sin and Salvation

On his feast day today, thinking of St. Thomas, the Apostle, in his bold profession of faith, "My Lord and My God!", just like St. Paul, blinded by the light of Christ, on the road to Damascus: both offer us powerful assurances of the "then" of conversion in and for the life of the Church, which cannot be without consequences for the "now" of our conversion and discipleship for the sake of the proclamation of the Gospel to the ends of the earth. Jesus, Risen and in Glory, breaks in where He wills; He chooses us for Himself out of boundless love. None of this happens outside the context of the Church. Except in God's unbounded mercy, salvation really doesn't take place outside of Christ's Church and that Church generates a culture which fosters and sustains both near and far. What was true for St. Thomas and St. Paul is no less so for us today, as the Lord bids us to follow Him in faith, hope and love.

Since sharing some of my thoughts into what I believe to be at stake in Chapter 1 of Sherry Weddell's book: Forming Intentional Disciples: The Path to Knowing and Following Jesus,  Our Sunday Visitor, (2012-07-05), my plan was to read her whole book and then write a review as I do with most things I read, like and hope others might pick up and read as well.  I did that first reflection because I was already dealing with the topic from another source expressing reticence and even rejection concerning the notion of the key role in ecclesiology yet today of Volkskirche or Catholic culture, as regards what we mean by Church and for the destiny of Catholicism in the modern world. We cannot do without a cultural context for Catholicism, because popular culture, in the Catholic sense, cannot be excised or radiated away from Church, which only is if it is incarnational. Church as an invisible spiritual something is a heresy. Ubi Petrus, ibi Ecclesia. The bond which His Bride the Church shares with Christ is concrete.

Much to my surprise, what I wrote moved others quite strongly, some in negative fashion (Criticism on my part does not exclude appreciation and esteem) and others in a positive way. I'm still in a bit of a quandary as to why the notion of "Catholic culture" sets off bad vibes for so many. My fear is that, as most of my interlocutors are younger, they may be confusing our culture when healthy, better or at its best with the hopeless parochial wasteland all too often experienced over the last 40 years (Cultural Catholicism is another phenomenon, not to be confused with Catholic culture). I fear that too little attention is paid to the exalted nature of Christ's Church in the concrete, which per force is played out within a cultural context. I don't think most of those who dismiss the notion of "Catholic culture" really know what they are dismissing; they seem to be jousting with a straw-man or a windmill and not the real thing. One of my reasons for suspecting this derives from a quote in Sherry's Chapter 7, which insinuates as much:

"One of the biggest things our community lacked was an experience of the supernatural dimension of the Christian life. It just wasn’t on our radar. They had “unintentional” encounters in the liturgy but never something that they felt or experienced as having an impact. Eucharistic Adoration with teens and adults has been a powerful experience of the presence of Christ. Eucharistic Adoration gives them an experience of encountering God." (pp. 164-165. Kindle Edition.)

I have said it before and I will say it again: the present malaise in parish life is not the norm for Catholic culture, but a perversion of the culture, the nurturing environment, if you will, which we have always fought to maintain in our parishes, as the outward manifestation of the inexhaustible mystery which is Christ's Church. People find refuge in the Adoration Chapel from the typically abusive situation of banal parish liturgy and worse; Divine worship is not meant to be so but rather better. Most Adoration Chapels present a genuine oasis in the midst of life's turmoil: they display a universe properly ordered to God and inviting; they have a pretty gold monstrance to display or enthrone the Bread of Life and they have the homage to our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament of flowers and candles; they are places of quiet: they are a remnant of what once was in the parish church and was once not confined to a small chapel, but was all pervasive. Would it really be too much to say that Adoration Chapels are the places where the peace of Christ reigns supreme? Please, don't count me hysterical if I ask, looking at lots of church buildings and how they are employed today, "Where is beauty? Where is genuine worship of the Living God to be found today?" 

Couple this with errant calls for a non-judgmental treatment of defections from Catholicism by some "seekers" going over to other groups in order "to be fed" (they say). But call defection, please, by its right name: call it such based on a false irenicism or on an outright denial of the true nature of Christ's Church. I don't know how one can ignore the divisive spirit which has invaded the temple, the looming shadow of that old American "Gospel Holiness Tradition" of condemning the other and separating oneself off from sinners so perceived. While it may be wrong to be cranky or mean-spirited, hard on those who waver, it is still just plain wrong to cater to types who refuse grace, or demand it on their own terms, or set off on their not-so-merry way, damning everyone else.

Pre-Baptismal exorcism is an integral part of the celebration of the first of the sacraments of initiation. It is not only descriptive of the state of the soul without grace, but answers a real need, because without the life-giving waters of the font, people are in Satan's grasp; he must be driven out. What is the basic kerygma? "Turn away from sin!" We are baptized into Christ's death and saving Resurrection. His life is bestowed upon us through the Sacraments, seven of them, which He entrusted to His Church. Post-Baptismal Penance, the Sacrament of Reconciliation is a great need. Woe is me, if I don't kneel before the priest for penance and absolution for my faults, yes, my most grievous faults (thanks be to God, we hear those words again!).

Truly, I fear that those who so lightly dismiss Catholic culture don't understand that it goes far beyond certain quaint customs and is for us today just as, if not more, important than the synagogue was as a foundation for spreading the Gospel in apostolic times. As "discipled" as I may be, I am not the locus of the Church, treated as if it were something diaphanous cloaking me like the fog from which a ghost ship suddenly appears on someone's movie horizon.

Am I saying more than that I think "Catholic culture" has gotten a bad rap in some quarters? I think yes. I am saying the New Testament documents the conversion and commitment of true disciples, but leaves it to the Lord Jesus Himself to raise them up. We work hard to spread the Gospel, as St. Paul admonished us, but we do so while clinging to Mother Church. Tradition has its big "T's" and its small "t's"; they don't always let themselves be so easily sorted and the same could be said of "culture". Unintentional anything? No, call it rather "tepidity" and brand it a sin. The strategy of the culture has never been to foster tepidity and hold people bound in ignorance to the Church, but to light the way to Christ. 

  

Which Lectionary?

It came home to me again this morning just how much time had passed since I had spent time with the FIUV Position Papers : too long! I find a balance in this effort which encourages, never falling short of provoking an honest examination of the status quo.

I thoroughly enjoyed and highly recommend: Positio N. 15 THE LECTIONARY OF THE EXTRAORDINARY FORM. It gives me occasion, among other things, to make a plug again for the wisdom of what Benedict XVI has hallowed, recommending the growing together of the two forms of the Roman Rite, as "mutual enrichment". The position paper, especially in the Appendices A & B, casts a clear light on a few of our lost treasures in need of recovery for the sake of our own enrichment. Particularly sobering for "new" Lectionary enthusiasts should be the non taxative list of Scripture passages from the 1962 Missal, no longer heard in church even in the course of three years.

Furthermore, encouraged as I am by how Pope Benedict XVI was able to wrest exegesis from the sterility of the recent past and gift us with a lectio worthy of the great Fathers and Doctors of the Church, I wish to second a very important point made obliquely in Paper N. 15, concerning pitfalls of the Lectionary prescribed for the Ordinary Form. In speaking about the Lectionary which forms an integral part of the 1962 Missal, the author comments:

"4. The Lectionary’s development is such that, while the Sunday Gospels and Epistles each form a discernible series, the two series are independent of each other. We are not presented with connections between readings dependent on the exegetical preferences of scholars of any particular age, but rather a more fundamental working-out of the mysteries of salvation."

The point is well taken and reflects back on the merit of upholding a millennial tradition of the essential canon which has and should nourish our liturgical tradition. This thought brings me back to Appendix B and an interview with Vatican Radio by Jeffrey Tucker, which spoke convincingly of the benefits for our liturgy of the recovery of our patrimony of Gregorian Chant now under way, which has gone leagues to helping with the implementation of what has either been ignored or has remained vestigial in many if not most parishes from 1970 up until the present day (viz. antiphons, et. al.).

The issue of the Lectionary also "bleeds over" inexorably into the question of calendar reform and the rollback of the Sanctoral cycle generally, but most specifically in favor of the new ferial Lectionary in its two year cycle of first readings. 

"8. The ancient ferial Lectionary did not displace the readings for feast days, and given the fullness of the Sanctoral cycle in Rome, and the developing popularity of Votive Masses, it seems likely that the editors of Roman Missals from the 13th century onwards thought it was unnecessary: there is clearly little point in a cycle of readings which is rarely used. The Lenten ferial cycle could only avoid being swamped by feasts and votive Masses by giving it a greater liturgical priority. A relative paucity of feast days is appropriate to the Lenten season, as is the distinctive character of the ferial Mass formularies, which also include ancient, complex, and profoundly beautiful chants."

I wish the paper hadn't used the word "swamped" to describe the ascendancy of the Sanctoral cycle. You might say that the author lends credence thereby to the thesis which establishes "defense lines" or "levies" to hold back the Sanctoral "tide" for the sake of daily mass goers now deprived of the richness of Matins from once upon a time. I can remember in seminary being taught  to privilege the ferial cycle in Ordinary Time over choices from the various appendices of the Lectionary for optional memorials of Saints. I find intriguing the fact that with the most recent edition of the Lectionary for the U.S. appropriate choices have been made for every saint. A priest friend of mine in this regard has "gone Sanctoral" if you will. Maybe a restoration of an enriched Matins would indeed be a better route to go and more in tune with an ancient spiritual tendency for the proper nourishment of Christ's Bride?

No doubt some will advise me as a mere dilettante to stand clear of realms where "black belt liturgists" have reason to fear. Naive as I am, I cannot help but share the enthusiasm of those which see the reform of the reformed liturgy already in course. In this holiday time of warm weather in the northern hemisphere many a small child is getting his first dunk in a lake or a pool secure in Daddy's firm grasp. He will soon be in the swim of things and through "mutual enrichment" and exposure to treasures many thought lost, we may sooner than later find ourselves awash in the richness of our great tradition.

You are my inheritance, O Lord!

Looking to the readings for the 13th Sunday tomorrow, I was very much struck by the familiar verse of the Responsorial Psalm: "You are my inheritance, O Lord".

Having been "on the road" and incomunicado for nearly two weeks, the latest scandals from Rome, involving priests and former priests, money and sodomy, hit me with full force. Such is not and cannot be the way of the prophet or the priest; we belong to Christ; our hearts are to be set on Him alone. Where are all these "double lives" coming from?

Fortunately, neither was I born with the proverbial silver spoon in my mouth nor do rich benefactors seem to find me irresistible. By the grace of God, I have been spared much, as I don't have the material means to be tempted to amass more either legally or illegally and gambling has never been an attraction. Nonetheless, who among us is spared from setting our sights on something or someone short of the Lord Himself as our portion and cup, our prize? A pittance could very well be a miser's downfall and another man's hell. 

Yes, we, especially secular priests, must strengthen our resolve. Those in authority must be more vigilant in guarding access to the sheepfold, barring the way to the ignoble hireling and the thief; yes, the temple must be cleansed. But we priests must also be more honest in examining our consciences and rooting out all forms of self-indulgence; we must seek the desert experience and dependence upon Him alone. St. Jean Marie Vianney remains our benchmark.

If I might risk offending in expressing myself thus, and lay people must help rather than hinder their priests on the path to holiness. Parishioners must become more solicitous in praying, in storming heaven asking God to make their priest holy, worrying less about whether Father gets out for a good dinner from time to time.

"You are my inheritance, O Lord". Let me never forget and let my people sustain me on the path that leads to His Kingdom!

PROPERANTES ADVENTUM DIEI DEI