Sunday, May 19, 2019

Friday, May 17, 2019

Adam DeVille on the New Moto Proprio

CWR: Pope Francis denounces clericalism, but his new motu proprio enables it
What “Vos estis lux mundi” neglects to draw to our attention—for obvious reasons—is that there is nothing requiring episcopal governance in its current monopolistic form.

By Dr. Adam A. J. DeVille

Thursday, May 16, 2019

Chorus novae Jerusalem



Authentic [Latin] Catholicism?

Rebuilding Authentic Catholicism upon the Ruins of the Conciliar Experiment by Peter Kwasniewski



The solution to the mess into which we have fallen through a long series of bad decisions is simple and at the same time exceedingly hard: we have to make the opposite decisions, again and again. The Church needs to stop thinking about new strategies, new programs, new pastoral initiatives, or any statistical measure of success, and resolutely throw herself again into the proclamation of the full Gospel, including its “hard sayings”; the celebration of solemn and beautiful liturgy; the building of monasteries and religious communities on the foundation of the usus antiquior; the cultivation of an intellectually robust curriculum in seminaries and universities; an encouragement of large families, as in the old days, and the promotion of homeschooling. Only by taking a seriously countercultural path is there any long-term hope for Catholicism. As a believer, I am convinced that the Faith will survive and prosper again, but only where such things are being done, or to the degree that they are being done.

Even if the OF in the vernacular is not the proper tool for cultivating a Christian spirituality rooted in the liturgy, will Latin traditionalists fare much better?


Tuesday, May 14, 2019

Video of Illumination Uploaded to YT



Alas, female altar server.

Interview with Fr. Wojciech Giertych, OP

CWR: Papal Household Theologian on sparking faith, returning to basics of Catholic life by Paul Senz
In the tradition of St. Thomas Aquinas, members of the Dominican Order tend to be particularly well-versed in philosophy, theology, scholasticism, and the great intellectual tradition of the Church. This is part of the reason [...]

Friday, May 10, 2019

Eastern Christian Books: Nicholas Denysenko on The People's Faith

Eastern Christian Books: Nicholas Denysenko on The People's Faith

Venice in the East

Ecclesial Survival of the Fittest

From a comment by Fr. Augustine Thompson over at Fr. Z's blog:

I lived through the 1960s and it was the rapid and authoritarian way the liturgical changes were imposed that drove people out—and they had been trained in a “culture of obedience”! The act of imposing a novel form of worship on them undercut the people’s faith, and so remotely lies behind the later long-term loss of practice and faith.

A similar imposition of mandated changes today would be met with an even greater exodus, especially if the changes were in the traditional direction. (It would be hard to think of further “liberalizing” changes as causing any great disruption, save for the small group of traditionalists who have already fled to traditional or traditionalist parishes / chaplaincies.) The idea that a top-down imposition of Pre-Vatican-II forms of worship will bring people back to the Church is disproved by this very article.

Mary Douglas, the great Catholic anthropologist, brilliantly analyzed the religiously destructive nature of massive changes in religious ritual and culture imposed by elitist authorities in her book Natural Symbols—which should be required reading for all involved with liturgy.

I agree: liturgical reform should not be imposed by Rome, though Rome should provide an example to the other local Churches using the Roman rite. Liturgical reform must be handled properly through local action by bishops and presbyters. (Should bishops impose their vision on their collaborating presbyters? Probably not.)  But what do we do if one bishop undoes the good work done by his predecessor? Hence we must have active laity and presbyters who will defend their "canonical rights." Even for liturgical reform to be handled well at the local level, there must be ecclesial reform that makes the institutional Church more accountable to the laity, and protection of presbyters from bishops who are opposed to orthodox reform. In other words, to protect orthodox reform (liturgical and otherwise) requires that reform include institutional practices of authority.

This is what is reasonable -- but I don't see what is reasonable happening -- what will happen is that there will be a competition between churches of different traditions for members, and those who are most responsive to the orthodox faithful will flourish, while those that are not will die out. Not only that but liturgical reform, while important, is only one part of the crisis in Christian spirituality and living that must be addressed. A feminized institutional Church that makes its liturgy better but does not address the reasons why men are not interested in "practicing religion" will still fail.

A Right to Have a Child?

Even if it is understood through the Natural Law as a restriction upon political authority, can we say that such a right or freedom is absolute? (Or even any right or freedom?)

With respect to the right to have a child -- even if a political authority cannot directly prohibit one from exercising it, can one say that this means that the authority is obliged to ensure that it is fulfilled or exercised without difficulty, or that there will be no negative consequences? For example, if there is a people fleeing or migrating to a new land, a journey that will take some time, one might say that it is a reasonable thing to suggest that the members of that people not engage in sexual relations, lest they be burdened with a pregnant woman who will prevent the group from traveling. And if such a woman gets pregnant, in extreme circumstances or danger, the people may be justified in leaving her behind in order to save the others.

Thursday, May 09, 2019

Liturgical Piety and Emotion

From "What Became of the Spirit of the Liturgy? Implementation of Sacrosanctum Concilium 1963—1965" by Susan Benofy

However, Guardini also says, the liturgy is difficult to adapt to modern man, who often finds it artificial and too formal, and prefers other forms of prayer which seem to have the advantage “of contemporary, or, at any rate, of congenial origin.”[8] But to be appropriate as a prayer for all people, and any situation, the liturgy must be formal, and keep “emotion under the strictest control.”[9]

The direct expression of emotion in prayer is more appropriate in personal prayer or popular devotions. These are rightly intended to appeal to certain tastes and circumstances, and consequently retain more local characteristics and aim more at individual edification, but they must remain distinct from the liturgy. “There could be no greater mistake than that of discarding the valuable elements in the spiritual life of the people for the sake of the liturgy, or than the desire of assimilating them to it.”[10] The liturgy is celebrated by the whole body of the faithful, not simply the assembled congregation. It embraces “all the faithful on earth; simultaneously it reaches beyond the bounds of time.”[11]

Guardini notes that, since the liturgy doesn’t fit any personality type exactly, all must sacrifice some of their own inclinations to properly enter into it. And, though liturgy requires fellowship, this does not mean ordinary social interaction. “[T]he union of the members is not directly accomplished from man to man. It is accomplished by and in their joint aim, goal, and spiritual resting place—God—by their identical creed, sacrifice and sacraments.”[12] Guardini insists that liturgical prayer “must spring from the fullness of truth. It is only truth—or dogma, to give it its other name—which can make prayer efficacious.”[13]

Missed This Article in March

CNA: St. Paul VI’s Feast to be Celebrated May 29

Optional, indeed.

Sacred Liturgy Conference

website



Good to see Bishop Daly sponsoring this at Gonzaga University. The speakers seemed to be slanted towards the traditionalist side -- is there anyone there to represent the "reform of the reform," or is that dead, having failed to gain any traction within the American Latin Churches? (No one to represent a Bouyerian reform, either.) Any no representation from the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter?