Music for the Masses
My wife is the organist for our little parish. She took over for my late Aunt Agnes who played more than sixty years until her retirement in the early 1990’s. The position is voluntary. The parish is too small to afford hiring a professional, although we do pay an organist from a neighboring parish to play one Mass on Sunday. The responsibility for selecting hymns each week falls on my wife’s shoulders, a task she has graciously delegated to me. Our parish entry in the diocesan register lists my wife and me, along with the hired organist as the parish music directors, a job for which I do not remember applying or volunteering. Nevertheless, I do my best to pick out hymns suited to the Sunday liturgies.
My liturgical music taste tends to be on the conservative side. Having grown up prior to Vatican II, I like traditional Catholic hymns, including some Latin occasionally. It came to my attention recently that some members of our parish Liturgy and Worship Committee thought our liturgical music needed to be a little more “uplifting”. At the same time, we were getting input from another person who wanted to teach chant at our parish. While I consider chant to be uplifting, I had the feeling that more chant was not what our Liturgy and Worship Committee had in mind.
Our pastor was doing his best to keep all factions happy, including my wife and me. I felt we were being pulled in two different directions, although confused over what exactly we were being asked to do. I thought it best to explain to the Liturgy and Worship Committee what we do each week in selecting the music for Mass. What follows is adapted from a letter I wrote for presentation to the committee. Part of it is taken from an earlier blog entry about Latin in the liturgy. I should add that this letter has not yet been presented to the Committee.
Music selection is not a job we particularly enjoy. Although it may seem like we sing the same stuff every week, the preparation is quite time consuming! Our parish currently uses the Breaking Bread Hymnal published by Oregon Catholic Press. As part of their service, they provide liturgy preparation for all Sundays, weekdays, Holydays, and special liturgies. This includes suggested hymns for each part of the Mass. Each week, we log onto their website and look at the suggested hymns. We also look at the Scripture readings for that Sunday. Using their suggestions and taking into consideration what we are capable of doing, we try to choose hymns appropriate for the day.
We have over 150 selections in the current repertoire. Many are seasonal, and some are better suited to certain parts of the Mass. For example, the Communion hymns generally have a Eucharistic lyric. The hymn at the Preparation of the Gifts needs to be short so we can finish before Father says the Offertory prayers. When all criteria are met, the choices are actually quite limited. We try to add a new hymn from time to time, but prefer doing this after we have had the opportunity to practice it with the choir.
Liturgical music selection is a controversial topic these days. Much has been written about various Church documents on music in the liturgy. It is my observation that liturgists are very opinionated and often in disagreement. In the past six months or so, we have been approached by a parishioner who wants to teach us Gregorian Chant, as well as others who want more contemporary music. At this time, we are pretty much limited to what is available in our hymnal. We have tried to choose music that is reverent, primarily God-centered, and compatible with the Gospel message for that Sunday.
Just because a hymn is published in a Catholic hymnal does not mean it is appropriate to sing during Mass. Some hymns contain lyrics that can be interpreted to convey a Protestant theology. Amazing Grace is a common example of a hymn that appears in many Catholic hymnals, but contains lyrics that may suggest a Calvinist belief. This doesn’t mean it can’t be sung at Mass, but some Catholics who are well catechized in the finer points of Church teaching on salvation find the lyrics problematic. Not long ago, we came across a Communion hymn worded in such a way to sound consubstantial (Lutheran), rather than transubstantial (Catholic). Though some criticisms may be subject to interpretation, we try to avoid such hymns out of respect to those sensitive to these issues.
We were asked why our music can’t be more uplifting. Uplifting means different things to different people, so I am not sure how to answer. Certainly there is a time and a place for various types of Catholic music. The Mass is the actual Sacrifice of Calvary made present, once and for all, outside the limits of space and time. At Mass, we witness a miracle that places us at the foot of the Cross. We are kneeling in the Real Live Presence of Jesus as He gives Himself up for us. In selecting appropriate music, we should consider where we are and what we are witnessing. While we can sing joyfully in gratitude for our salvation, music within the Sacrifice of the Mass should be reverent and contemplative. In this sense, uplifting does not mean upbeat and lively to me. Nonetheless, Father has asked us to look for some contemporary music that might be appropriate for use at Mass. Suggestions would be welcomed.
Some parishioners are questioning the increased use of Latin in the liturgy, and I would like to address this at some length. Are we caving in to traditional Catholics who want to return the Church to pre-Vatican II liturgies? The answer is no. Vatican II reaffirmed that Gregorian Chant is especially suited to the Roman Liturgy, but also said other kinds of sacred music must not be excluded. The operative word here is “sacred”. In the years following Vatican II, the Latin chants fell into disuse, and sacred hymns were replaced with praise songs deemed more popular for congregational singing. Some refer to this period as the “protestantization” of the Catholic liturgy.
I recently came across an Internet blog on liturgical music written by Father Mark (I don’t know his surname) from the Diocese of Tulsa. He said, “The way we sing at Mass effectively shapes one's understanding -- or misunderstanding -- of the Church, of the priesthood, and of the hierarchical ordering of the liturgical assembly. A protestantized approach to music at Mass will inevitably engender a protestantized ecclesiology.” This makes sense to me, and I believe it contributes to some of the loss of reverence for the Real Presence in the Blessed Sacrament. Mass attendance has certainly decreased in the past few decades. Hardly anyone comes to Eucharistic adoration on Sunday mornings, and our pastor often mentions how few confessions he hears. These are all opportunities to receive graces in ways unavailable to our Protestant brothers and sisters. Yet, many Catholics no longer take advantage of them.
I think Father Mark is referring to a type of music quite prevalent in our diocese. While we have consciously attempted to avoid this pitfall, I suppose some of the songs we sing fall into this category. The problem is that many people like these songs even though they would hardly be considered sacred music. Under Pope Benedict, the Church is experiencing a renewed interest in tapping into our rich musical history. Are we gradually going back to all Latin? No. Father asked us to do Mass settings in Latin during Lent and we gladly obliged. From time to time, we will sing a traditional Latin hymn during Communion, and use Latin Mass settings seasonally or on special occasions.
There are good reasons for singing and praying in Latin. Two of the four marks of the Church are catholic, meaning universal, and one, indicating unity. If we are truly united, we must share the same mind and spirit, as Paul tells us. Maintaining our unity in the mind of the Church that exists all over the world is not an easy task. Prior to Vatican II when all Masses were universally celebrated in Latin, Catholics all over the world were hearing and saying the same things. Translating the mind of the Church into all the languages of the world presents challenges. Any time a translation is made, the meaning is filtered through the mind of the translator.
Several years ago, we were sitting in a restaurant on a Lenten Friday trying to find meatless dishes to order. My son asked why it was permissible to eat fish, but not other types of meat. I didn’t have a good answer at the time, but I found one courtesy of Catholic apologist Jimmy Akin on his web page. (http://www.jimmyakin.org/2005/02/fish_fridays.html) He explained that all Church law is written in Latin. On Ash Wednesday and the Fridays of Lent, we are required to abstain from eating carnis, which we translate as meat in English. In Latin, carnis literally means a land-dwelling, warm-blooded animal. Fish are neither land-dwelling nor warm-blooded, so they are not considered carnis. All carnis is meat, but not all meat is carnis. Therefore, under Church law, it is acceptable to eat fish on days of abstinence even if one considers fish to be meat. By strict definition, one could also eat turtle or frog legs if so inclined. When we translate the Latin into English, the message is slightly distorted.
Our English language undergoes subtle changes over time, sometimes called semantic drift. This happens in many different ways through every day usage. Words take on new meanings or connotations. Catholic apologists occasionally have to explain that they are so called because they explain and defend certain positions or doctrines of the Church. This type of apology has nothing to do with expressing regret as we commonly use the word today. That same apologist may also find it necessary to explain that when we pray to saints, we are simply asking for their intercession. The word pray originally meant to ask, and that is the way Catholics use it. Prayer in that sense is not a form of worship as many non-Catholics believe.
Changes in the language may seem insignificant, but variations in the way we communicate happen more rapidly than one might think. Our parents used expressions that would seem dated or even nonsensical today. Our children sometimes communicate in slang we do not understand. Find a hundred year-old newspaper and see how much writing styles have changed in a century. Now imagine the challenge facing a two thousand year-old Church in accurately passing down revelation to everyone living today.
That is one of the beauties of Latin. Being a dead language, it is not subject to semantic drift the way other languages are. After Vatican II, the Mass had to be translated into every language of the world. Vernacular translations employ dynamic equivalence, meaning the literal language is translated to convey the intended message. The translator must interpret the mind of the Church and choose words that best represent that idea. When sacred hymns are translated, the English is often changed even more to make the lyrics rhyme.
For most of this decade, the International Commission on English in the Liturgy (ICEL) has been working on a new English translation of the liturgy that more accurately expresses the original Latin. Wording of the Gloria, Sanctus and some of the responses will be revised, making our current Mass settings obsolete. The Commission had a very difficult time coming up with wording the majority of Bishops could agree on. Missals will have to be reprinted and music re-written to reflect the changes. The Church hierarchy deems all this trouble necessary because our current translation does not always express the original Latin as accurately as it should.
When we pray and sing in Latin, none of these distractions come into play. Latin expresses Catholicism in its pristine historical form, a form universal (i.e. catholic) to the Church in its fullness and entirety. It is our faith expressed free of a Commission’s debated interpretation. At that moment, we are entrusting the unaltered mind of the Church to express our love for God in words that we may not even understand. It’s not something we would necessarily want to do exclusively because its also good to know what we are saying, but there exists a certain beauty in honoring our Church heritage by praying and singing in her native language.
With all the different ideas out there, pleasing everyone won’t happen. Please understand that no matter what music we choose, somebody ain’t gonna like it. Anytime we try to introduce something new, something old or something different, people will think we are pushing a certain agenda, which really isn’t the case. We are not trying to be conservative or liberal, just orthodox. If you hear a lively praise band in other parishes, it doesn’t necessarily mean they are doing things right and we are stuck in the middle ages. I hope some people will appreciate our efforts to maintain our ties to Rome and our history, but we don’t pretend to have all the answers, so please bear with us. I just read a comment by someone on an Internet forum who said, “The difference between a choir leader and a Somali pirate is you can negotiate with a Somali pirate.” We want to be receptive to suggestions and will try to accommodate as best we can. Perhaps the Liturgy and Worship Committee could go through our hymnal and pick out some songs they would like to try. If we can work them into the liturgy, we will. If we can’t, we will try to explain why. Feel free to come to choir practice anytime and join in.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Spread the Word
I wish I could remember the exact date. It was sometime in the mid-1990’s. Our pastor had mailed a flier to every address in the community inviting them to hear a former Baptist tell of his conversion to Catholicism. I remember wondering what our pastor was getting himself into. Surely this was going to backfire. Either this guy is still a Baptist who has hoodwinked our priest into thinking he was going to speak for the Church and will instead try to set us Catholics straight, or the many Baptists in the area will turn out and hang this guy out to roast.
I was a somewhat lukewarm Catholic at the time. I went to Mass every week, but I thought the Pope didn’t really understand what it was like to live in the world today. Protestants had challenged me about my Catholic Faith, and I really had no answers. Church teaching seemed pretty antiquated to me and I couldn’t understand why a Baptist would want to become Catholic. So, I decided I had to attend the event to see what was going to happen.
That night, I met a young Catholic convert named Tim Staples and my life would never be quite the same again. In the span of about two hours, he lit a fire in me that still burns to this day. Tim told his conversion story, how he was a bold anti-catholic evangelical in the Marine Corp who took pride in pulling ignorant Catholics out the Church until he was challenged by another Catholic Marine who actually knew his faith. In his talk, he discussed many of the same challenges that had been thrown at me by a co-worker. He taught me that all of these challenges have reasonable answers. He taught me that we Catholics can be confident that we are in the one true Church established by Jesus Christ. I learned to appreciate the Magesterial teaching authority of the Pope in union with the Bishops.
Such profound change occurred for me that evening. I became so excited by the Catholic Faith that I now try to share my excitement whenever the opportunity arises. When people ask me to tell my story, I always go back to that evening when I met Tim Staples, and I also give credit to our priest at that time, Father Mark Mazza, who had the courage and foresight to bring Tim to our little parish. But my most sincere appreciation and respect goes to a man named Matt Dula. Who is Matt Dula? He was the Catholic Marine who had the courage to stand up to a very cocky anti-Catholic and ultimately figured in his conversion. Had he not done so, perhaps Tim would still be pulling people out of the Church. As it turned out, Tim became a fervent Catholic apologist responsible for countless conversions.
You see it is not enough to learn the faith. We must also be ready to share and defend it. Someone undoubtedly had an impact on Matt Dula’s religious education enabling him to go toe to toe with Tim Staples. I doubt that Matt Dula had any inkling that his defense of the Faith would later affect so many souls, including my own. One small spark can start a raging wildfire. I hope and pray that I may be one to fan the flames.
I wish I could remember the exact date. It was sometime in the mid-1990’s. Our pastor had mailed a flier to every address in the community inviting them to hear a former Baptist tell of his conversion to Catholicism. I remember wondering what our pastor was getting himself into. Surely this was going to backfire. Either this guy is still a Baptist who has hoodwinked our priest into thinking he was going to speak for the Church and will instead try to set us Catholics straight, or the many Baptists in the area will turn out and hang this guy out to roast.
I was a somewhat lukewarm Catholic at the time. I went to Mass every week, but I thought the Pope didn’t really understand what it was like to live in the world today. Protestants had challenged me about my Catholic Faith, and I really had no answers. Church teaching seemed pretty antiquated to me and I couldn’t understand why a Baptist would want to become Catholic. So, I decided I had to attend the event to see what was going to happen.
That night, I met a young Catholic convert named Tim Staples and my life would never be quite the same again. In the span of about two hours, he lit a fire in me that still burns to this day. Tim told his conversion story, how he was a bold anti-catholic evangelical in the Marine Corp who took pride in pulling ignorant Catholics out the Church until he was challenged by another Catholic Marine who actually knew his faith. In his talk, he discussed many of the same challenges that had been thrown at me by a co-worker. He taught me that all of these challenges have reasonable answers. He taught me that we Catholics can be confident that we are in the one true Church established by Jesus Christ. I learned to appreciate the Magesterial teaching authority of the Pope in union with the Bishops.
Such profound change occurred for me that evening. I became so excited by the Catholic Faith that I now try to share my excitement whenever the opportunity arises. When people ask me to tell my story, I always go back to that evening when I met Tim Staples, and I also give credit to our priest at that time, Father Mark Mazza, who had the courage and foresight to bring Tim to our little parish. But my most sincere appreciation and respect goes to a man named Matt Dula. Who is Matt Dula? He was the Catholic Marine who had the courage to stand up to a very cocky anti-Catholic and ultimately figured in his conversion. Had he not done so, perhaps Tim would still be pulling people out of the Church. As it turned out, Tim became a fervent Catholic apologist responsible for countless conversions.
You see it is not enough to learn the faith. We must also be ready to share and defend it. Someone undoubtedly had an impact on Matt Dula’s religious education enabling him to go toe to toe with Tim Staples. I doubt that Matt Dula had any inkling that his defense of the Faith would later affect so many souls, including my own. One small spark can start a raging wildfire. I hope and pray that I may be one to fan the flames.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Preacher or Teacher
I find myself feeling very frustrated these days. Seems to me very few Catholics know even the basics of their faith. Even those who are active in the Church, serving on pastoral councils, parish commissions, Knights of Columbus, Christian Mothers, you name it, most approach these services as political or social rather than spiritual. Yes, I am generalizing, perhaps unfairly, but I have seen little evidence to think otherwise.
The Church has been in existence 2000 years. Up until a few hundred years ago, being Christian meant being Catholic. The faith was handed down from generation to generation. I received my Catholic Faith from my mother’s side of the family that immigrated from Czechoslovakia some five generations ago. As the Church protects the deposit of Faith from error over the centuries, Catholic parents have taught the Faith to their children. When one person in a family loses or rejects the faith, the Faith is then likely lost to that persons descendants. Most of the millions of good Protestant families out there probably have a Catholic ancestor who for some reason left the Church.
I look around our community today and see many Catholics who just quit going to Mass and are not raising their children in the Faith. In most cases, their ancestors preserved the family faith for 2000 years only to have one of their descendants break the chain. Barring a personal conversion, that precious Catholic Faith will be lost forever to their future descendants. How sad.
Why does this happen? I blame ignorance for the most part. Most Catholics are poorly catechized. Anyone truly understanding what the Catholic Church is and knowing the reality of eternity, would never leave the Church. I was bothered by a conversation I recently overheard between two very active Catholics speaking of receiving Communion in Protestant churches. One spoke of attending an Episcopal wedding where everyone was invited to receive communion. She was asking the other Catholic if it was okay to do so. He told her he didn’t see anything wrong with it, and had himself received in a Lutheran church when traveling with another person. Another told of visiting a dying relative in a hospital when a woman Episcopal minister came in an offered to perform a communion service. Their response was that it couldn’t hurt, so they did it. I did speak up, trying to charitably explain why it was wrong to do so, but they seemed to think Catholic rules were too restrictive.
When attempts are made to provide catechesis for adults at our parish, the people who need it most never attend. Those who do are already seemingly grounded in the Faith. Hence my frustration. What can we do to evangelize people who are already Catholic, let alone those who are not? I have said this before, but I truly believe education from the pulpit is where it must begin. That twenty minute homily each week is the only opportunity we have to light the fire. Priests may need to take a different approach to homilies, shifting modes from preaching to teaching.
Our current pastor writes his homilies in manuscript form and reads them to the congregation. I can understand why he may prefer to do this. He and I are about the same age, and I know how easy it is to lose my train of thought as I get older. Working with a prepared text allows the author to organize thoughts and edit them for content. He can say exactly what he wants to convey without fear of leaving something out or speaking in error. Yet in doing so, he loses effectiveness. What is gained in the transmission may be lost in the reception. There is nothing more boring than listening to someone read a lengthy script.
In speaking from the heart, the priest engages the congregation in a way that captures the attention of the listener. People are more likely to remember details from a conversation than from a speech. Catholics are more apt to accept Church teaching if they know the history and understand the origin of doctrine. Catholic belief comes from Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magesterial Authority of the Church. The Liturgy of the Word gives the priest plenty of opportunities to take an apologetic approach to his homily by explaining how Church doctrine developed from God-breathed revelation.
We have not had a Catholic school at our parish since 1972, and religious instruction since that time has been inadequate. Every Sunday as our altar servers arrive for Mass, I see them walk right past the monstrance completely oblivious to the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament. Some of them will make a mechanical curtsy in the general direction of the tabernacle, but they clearly have no concept of where they are. This often happens in view of their parents and catechists. Seeing the same young faces behave the same way week after week leads me to believe they are not being properly formed, probably because their parents and those teaching them were not properly taught either.
Our hope lies in the parish priest being able to inspire a desire in his parish to grow in faith. Those who are spiritually distant are unlikely to respond favorably to verbal chastisement or criticism from the pulpit. That is not to say the message should be sugarcoated. Rather, many need to be lovingly taught the very basics of the faith, as though they are children hearing them for the first time. It may actually be the first time for some. 1 Peter 3:15 comes to mind again. Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts. Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, but do it with gentleness and reverence. With understanding comes appreciation and the desire to know more.
I find myself feeling very frustrated these days. Seems to me very few Catholics know even the basics of their faith. Even those who are active in the Church, serving on pastoral councils, parish commissions, Knights of Columbus, Christian Mothers, you name it, most approach these services as political or social rather than spiritual. Yes, I am generalizing, perhaps unfairly, but I have seen little evidence to think otherwise.
The Church has been in existence 2000 years. Up until a few hundred years ago, being Christian meant being Catholic. The faith was handed down from generation to generation. I received my Catholic Faith from my mother’s side of the family that immigrated from Czechoslovakia some five generations ago. As the Church protects the deposit of Faith from error over the centuries, Catholic parents have taught the Faith to their children. When one person in a family loses or rejects the faith, the Faith is then likely lost to that persons descendants. Most of the millions of good Protestant families out there probably have a Catholic ancestor who for some reason left the Church.
I look around our community today and see many Catholics who just quit going to Mass and are not raising their children in the Faith. In most cases, their ancestors preserved the family faith for 2000 years only to have one of their descendants break the chain. Barring a personal conversion, that precious Catholic Faith will be lost forever to their future descendants. How sad.
Why does this happen? I blame ignorance for the most part. Most Catholics are poorly catechized. Anyone truly understanding what the Catholic Church is and knowing the reality of eternity, would never leave the Church. I was bothered by a conversation I recently overheard between two very active Catholics speaking of receiving Communion in Protestant churches. One spoke of attending an Episcopal wedding where everyone was invited to receive communion. She was asking the other Catholic if it was okay to do so. He told her he didn’t see anything wrong with it, and had himself received in a Lutheran church when traveling with another person. Another told of visiting a dying relative in a hospital when a woman Episcopal minister came in an offered to perform a communion service. Their response was that it couldn’t hurt, so they did it. I did speak up, trying to charitably explain why it was wrong to do so, but they seemed to think Catholic rules were too restrictive.
When attempts are made to provide catechesis for adults at our parish, the people who need it most never attend. Those who do are already seemingly grounded in the Faith. Hence my frustration. What can we do to evangelize people who are already Catholic, let alone those who are not? I have said this before, but I truly believe education from the pulpit is where it must begin. That twenty minute homily each week is the only opportunity we have to light the fire. Priests may need to take a different approach to homilies, shifting modes from preaching to teaching.
Our current pastor writes his homilies in manuscript form and reads them to the congregation. I can understand why he may prefer to do this. He and I are about the same age, and I know how easy it is to lose my train of thought as I get older. Working with a prepared text allows the author to organize thoughts and edit them for content. He can say exactly what he wants to convey without fear of leaving something out or speaking in error. Yet in doing so, he loses effectiveness. What is gained in the transmission may be lost in the reception. There is nothing more boring than listening to someone read a lengthy script.
In speaking from the heart, the priest engages the congregation in a way that captures the attention of the listener. People are more likely to remember details from a conversation than from a speech. Catholics are more apt to accept Church teaching if they know the history and understand the origin of doctrine. Catholic belief comes from Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Magesterial Authority of the Church. The Liturgy of the Word gives the priest plenty of opportunities to take an apologetic approach to his homily by explaining how Church doctrine developed from God-breathed revelation.
We have not had a Catholic school at our parish since 1972, and religious instruction since that time has been inadequate. Every Sunday as our altar servers arrive for Mass, I see them walk right past the monstrance completely oblivious to the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament. Some of them will make a mechanical curtsy in the general direction of the tabernacle, but they clearly have no concept of where they are. This often happens in view of their parents and catechists. Seeing the same young faces behave the same way week after week leads me to believe they are not being properly formed, probably because their parents and those teaching them were not properly taught either.
Our hope lies in the parish priest being able to inspire a desire in his parish to grow in faith. Those who are spiritually distant are unlikely to respond favorably to verbal chastisement or criticism from the pulpit. That is not to say the message should be sugarcoated. Rather, many need to be lovingly taught the very basics of the faith, as though they are children hearing them for the first time. It may actually be the first time for some. 1 Peter 3:15 comes to mind again. Sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts. Always be ready to give an explanation to anyone who asks you for a reason for your hope, but do it with gentleness and reverence. With understanding comes appreciation and the desire to know more.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Conscience Formation
During the summer months, Mass attendance at our little parish has dwindled substantially, prompting our pastor to post a sign out front that says, “There is no vacation from God.” I grew up with the idea that attending Sunday Mass was not optional. In second grade, Sister Clarencia told us missing Sunday Mass was a Mortal Sin unless we were truly sick and unable to go, and if you die with a Mortal Sin on your soul, you will go to hell. I also remember the story of the guy who left Mass right after Communion only to be hit by a train on the way home. Today, it seems to be no longer "spiritually correct" to use such scare tactics, but they worked on me.
All of this makes me wonder how to get people back in the pews. Fear, while being an effective motivator for some, is not best reason for going to Mass. How do we get people to desire the graces they need to reach the ultimate goal of eternal salvation? Those of us who have been around awhile see the change that has taken place, especially since Vatican II. The emphasis on the Fear of the Lord has been replaced with the God is Love message. The danger of damnation is not talked about much anymore. Rather, Catholics want to leave Mass feeling good about themselves and many priests try to accommodate them.
Our current pastor is rather old school in his delivery. His homilies are stern at times, and folks come away feeling they have been chewed out for not living their lives to his standard of holiness. I suspect this has affected summer attendance more than family vacations. We will see whether attendance returns in the fall.
I don’t envy priests today. God knows there are many borderline Catholics out there who need to be drawn into a closer relationship. If the homily drives them away, there is little hope for bringing them back. Yet, sugarcoating the message can hide the bitter truth. There is a hell and people will go there. As our spiritual Father, the parish priest has to provide the delicate balance of a loving parent and firm disciplinarian.
Our diocesan paper carries a question and answer column by Reverend John Dietzen. In the July 12 issue, someone asked about a claim made at a Catholic symposium that Pope John Paul II said we can follow our consciences only when in accord with church teachings. The questioner wondered if that was really what the Pope taught. Before I read the answer, I thought to myself, I know how I would answer this. We have to follow our consciences, BUT we have an obligation to form our consciences in accordance with Church teaching. If we believe something contrary to what the Church teaches, we have a problem.
In his answer, Father Dietzen quotes from Pope John Paul’s book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, in which he says, “Man cannot be forced to accept the truth.” “He can be drawn to the truth only by his own nature, that is by his own freedom.” The Pope also cites St. Thomas Aquinas, who “maintains that it is wrong to make an act of faith in Christ if in one’s conscience one is convinced, however absurdly, that it is wrong to carry out such an act.” And finally, he refers to a statement by Cardinal John Henry Newman, also from the Pope’s book, where Cardinal Newman placed conscience above any outside authority, civil or religious.
When I read Father Dietzen’s answer, I immediately thought many Catholics will use this to justify most any behavior. All of these statements, taken out of context, emphasize the need to follow our own consciences, but little is said about our responsibility for forming our consciences. Father Dietzen concluded by saying, “People must search for the true and the good, especially when conscience itself becomes almost blind because of a habit of sin. But an honest conscience which searches for what is right always retains its dignity.” Perhaps he could have gone on to say that “the true and the good” can be found in the teachings of the Church and believing something in opposition to Church teaching is neither true nor good.
People need to be very careful when taking statements out of context to illustrate a point. I envision people further taking statements from Father Dietzen’s article out of context to support their own belief. According to the Pope and Cardinal Newman, conscience rates above any outside authority, civil or religious. Therefore, if I don’t believe it’s a sin to miss Mass on Sunday, it’s not a sin. If I don’t believe using artificial birth control is a sin, it’s not a sin. If I believe a woman should have the right to choose abortion, I can still receive Holy Communion.
Now, there is an element of truth here. We cannot commit a Mortal Sin if we truly and honestly believe it is not a sin. Yet, we have a responsibility as Catholics to form our consciences in accordance with Church teaching. If the Church tells us it is sinful to deliberately miss Mass on Sunday, to use artificial birth control, and to promote legal abortion, then it’s a sin for us to do any of those things. Yes, we must follow our consciences, but we must make sure our consciences are properly formed.
During the summer months, Mass attendance at our little parish has dwindled substantially, prompting our pastor to post a sign out front that says, “There is no vacation from God.” I grew up with the idea that attending Sunday Mass was not optional. In second grade, Sister Clarencia told us missing Sunday Mass was a Mortal Sin unless we were truly sick and unable to go, and if you die with a Mortal Sin on your soul, you will go to hell. I also remember the story of the guy who left Mass right after Communion only to be hit by a train on the way home. Today, it seems to be no longer "spiritually correct" to use such scare tactics, but they worked on me.
All of this makes me wonder how to get people back in the pews. Fear, while being an effective motivator for some, is not best reason for going to Mass. How do we get people to desire the graces they need to reach the ultimate goal of eternal salvation? Those of us who have been around awhile see the change that has taken place, especially since Vatican II. The emphasis on the Fear of the Lord has been replaced with the God is Love message. The danger of damnation is not talked about much anymore. Rather, Catholics want to leave Mass feeling good about themselves and many priests try to accommodate them.
Our current pastor is rather old school in his delivery. His homilies are stern at times, and folks come away feeling they have been chewed out for not living their lives to his standard of holiness. I suspect this has affected summer attendance more than family vacations. We will see whether attendance returns in the fall.
I don’t envy priests today. God knows there are many borderline Catholics out there who need to be drawn into a closer relationship. If the homily drives them away, there is little hope for bringing them back. Yet, sugarcoating the message can hide the bitter truth. There is a hell and people will go there. As our spiritual Father, the parish priest has to provide the delicate balance of a loving parent and firm disciplinarian.
Our diocesan paper carries a question and answer column by Reverend John Dietzen. In the July 12 issue, someone asked about a claim made at a Catholic symposium that Pope John Paul II said we can follow our consciences only when in accord with church teachings. The questioner wondered if that was really what the Pope taught. Before I read the answer, I thought to myself, I know how I would answer this. We have to follow our consciences, BUT we have an obligation to form our consciences in accordance with Church teaching. If we believe something contrary to what the Church teaches, we have a problem.
In his answer, Father Dietzen quotes from Pope John Paul’s book, Crossing the Threshold of Hope, in which he says, “Man cannot be forced to accept the truth.” “He can be drawn to the truth only by his own nature, that is by his own freedom.” The Pope also cites St. Thomas Aquinas, who “maintains that it is wrong to make an act of faith in Christ if in one’s conscience one is convinced, however absurdly, that it is wrong to carry out such an act.” And finally, he refers to a statement by Cardinal John Henry Newman, also from the Pope’s book, where Cardinal Newman placed conscience above any outside authority, civil or religious.
When I read Father Dietzen’s answer, I immediately thought many Catholics will use this to justify most any behavior. All of these statements, taken out of context, emphasize the need to follow our own consciences, but little is said about our responsibility for forming our consciences. Father Dietzen concluded by saying, “People must search for the true and the good, especially when conscience itself becomes almost blind because of a habit of sin. But an honest conscience which searches for what is right always retains its dignity.” Perhaps he could have gone on to say that “the true and the good” can be found in the teachings of the Church and believing something in opposition to Church teaching is neither true nor good.
People need to be very careful when taking statements out of context to illustrate a point. I envision people further taking statements from Father Dietzen’s article out of context to support their own belief. According to the Pope and Cardinal Newman, conscience rates above any outside authority, civil or religious. Therefore, if I don’t believe it’s a sin to miss Mass on Sunday, it’s not a sin. If I don’t believe using artificial birth control is a sin, it’s not a sin. If I believe a woman should have the right to choose abortion, I can still receive Holy Communion.
Now, there is an element of truth here. We cannot commit a Mortal Sin if we truly and honestly believe it is not a sin. Yet, we have a responsibility as Catholics to form our consciences in accordance with Church teaching. If the Church tells us it is sinful to deliberately miss Mass on Sunday, to use artificial birth control, and to promote legal abortion, then it’s a sin for us to do any of those things. Yes, we must follow our consciences, but we must make sure our consciences are properly formed.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Polite Conversation
Last week, I backed my pickup truck out of the garage and into the grill of my son’s car parked in the driveway. Someone had taken his usual parking spot so he pulled in behind me since there was no other space available. I had seen his car there earlier, but in my haste, I simply backed up without thinking or looking.
When I realized what I had done, I got angry. I immediately went in the house and told my son what happened. I told him I was sorry and would pay for the damage. (The car is in my name, and on my insurance policy.) As I brooded over the circumstances, I found myself trying to place the blame on someone else. If my daughter’s friend had not taken my son’s parking place, he would not have parked behind me. It’s always easier to direct anger at someone else rather than oneself. That didn’t last long, however. I knew I was the one who put the truck in reverse and backed up without looking.
Later that evening, the family lightheartedly rehashed the day’s events as we were going out to dinner after attending vigil Mass. My wife remarked that she was surprised to hear me tell my son I was sorry. This really shook me. “What do you mean?”, I said. “My life has been one continuous apology!” Actually, I got a little angry again. I have always considered myself ready to admit when I am wrong. I suggested that I have said those two words way more often than she has. Of course, I am probably wrong way more often than she is, but I didn’t say that. I joked about us getting into a huge argument in the restaurant we were about to enter, and then the conversation went on to other things.
The next morning, I spent an hour at Eucharistic Adoration. During some quiet time, I began thinking about what my wife said. Was she really surprised to hear me say, “I’m sorry”? Should I tell her I’m sorry for all the times I didn’t say I’m sorry? It is often not easy to admit we are wrong or have made a mistake. I always thought of myself as being somewhat generous with my apologies, but maybe others do not see me that way. Or could it be that members of my family do not see me that way?
I remember times when I have been in really bad moods for some reason, giving my family the quiet treatment, only to put my friendly face back on when guests arrive. Why would I treat strangers or acquaintances better than the people I love? Applying some self-analysis, I seem to want others to think well of me beyond what niceties may flow from me naturally. I may go out of my way to be polite to others, but become lax around members of my own family. I suppose it is natural to relax our efforts around people we are most comfortable with. This brings to mind the movie Love Story that popularized the line, “Love means never having to say you’re sorry.” I really have to disagree.
As a fan of the Chicago Cubs, I am a regular viewer of their baseball games on television. Former player and now Cub broadcaster, Bob Brenly, often jokes about the six key words that every husband should know for a successful marriage. They are: “Yes dear, you’re right, I’m sorry.” While always good for a laugh, he is actually speaking truth, provided those words are said with sincerity. Pride often keeps us from admitting when we are wrong.
Sorry is not the only word often going unsaid. What about thank you? We can never be too gracious, yet I am sure there are many times when I take for granted what others do for me. If memory serves me correctly, it was Msgr. Kenneth Velo during his funeral homily for Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, who told of the Cardinal sending thank you notes for thank you notes. How often during the coarse of a single day does someone else do something for us, and how often do we fail to show our appreciation? I’m sorry for all the times I didn’t say thank you.
It is particularly important for us Catholics to be ever gracious in our daily interaction with others, whether they be loved ones or perfect strangers. If we truly see Christ in every other human life, we should treat them as we would treat Him. Seeing Christ in the behavior of some people can be difficult at times. In those cases, it is all the more important that they can see Christ in us.
Last week, I backed my pickup truck out of the garage and into the grill of my son’s car parked in the driveway. Someone had taken his usual parking spot so he pulled in behind me since there was no other space available. I had seen his car there earlier, but in my haste, I simply backed up without thinking or looking.
When I realized what I had done, I got angry. I immediately went in the house and told my son what happened. I told him I was sorry and would pay for the damage. (The car is in my name, and on my insurance policy.) As I brooded over the circumstances, I found myself trying to place the blame on someone else. If my daughter’s friend had not taken my son’s parking place, he would not have parked behind me. It’s always easier to direct anger at someone else rather than oneself. That didn’t last long, however. I knew I was the one who put the truck in reverse and backed up without looking.
Later that evening, the family lightheartedly rehashed the day’s events as we were going out to dinner after attending vigil Mass. My wife remarked that she was surprised to hear me tell my son I was sorry. This really shook me. “What do you mean?”, I said. “My life has been one continuous apology!” Actually, I got a little angry again. I have always considered myself ready to admit when I am wrong. I suggested that I have said those two words way more often than she has. Of course, I am probably wrong way more often than she is, but I didn’t say that. I joked about us getting into a huge argument in the restaurant we were about to enter, and then the conversation went on to other things.
The next morning, I spent an hour at Eucharistic Adoration. During some quiet time, I began thinking about what my wife said. Was she really surprised to hear me say, “I’m sorry”? Should I tell her I’m sorry for all the times I didn’t say I’m sorry? It is often not easy to admit we are wrong or have made a mistake. I always thought of myself as being somewhat generous with my apologies, but maybe others do not see me that way. Or could it be that members of my family do not see me that way?
I remember times when I have been in really bad moods for some reason, giving my family the quiet treatment, only to put my friendly face back on when guests arrive. Why would I treat strangers or acquaintances better than the people I love? Applying some self-analysis, I seem to want others to think well of me beyond what niceties may flow from me naturally. I may go out of my way to be polite to others, but become lax around members of my own family. I suppose it is natural to relax our efforts around people we are most comfortable with. This brings to mind the movie Love Story that popularized the line, “Love means never having to say you’re sorry.” I really have to disagree.
As a fan of the Chicago Cubs, I am a regular viewer of their baseball games on television. Former player and now Cub broadcaster, Bob Brenly, often jokes about the six key words that every husband should know for a successful marriage. They are: “Yes dear, you’re right, I’m sorry.” While always good for a laugh, he is actually speaking truth, provided those words are said with sincerity. Pride often keeps us from admitting when we are wrong.
Sorry is not the only word often going unsaid. What about thank you? We can never be too gracious, yet I am sure there are many times when I take for granted what others do for me. If memory serves me correctly, it was Msgr. Kenneth Velo during his funeral homily for Joseph Cardinal Bernardin, who told of the Cardinal sending thank you notes for thank you notes. How often during the coarse of a single day does someone else do something for us, and how often do we fail to show our appreciation? I’m sorry for all the times I didn’t say thank you.
It is particularly important for us Catholics to be ever gracious in our daily interaction with others, whether they be loved ones or perfect strangers. If we truly see Christ in every other human life, we should treat them as we would treat Him. Seeing Christ in the behavior of some people can be difficult at times. In those cases, it is all the more important that they can see Christ in us.
Saturday, May 23, 2009
The Mary Mary Month of May
May is traditionally the month during which we Catholics give particular honor to our Blessed Mother. Our parish had a procession and crowning of the statue of Mary on Mother’s Day. We are also showing Marian videos in the parish hall on Monday and Wednesday evenings during May. Our pastor, Father Terry, asked me to preview the videos and set them up for showing at the scheduled times. I also make the popcorn.
The topic this month has centered on Marian apparitions, especially those of the twentieth century. I was familiar with Fatima, but many of the other reported apparitions were new to me. Among those were Garabandal (Spain), Betania (Venezuela), Kibeho (Africa), and Akita (Japan). Always being a bit skeptical, I wondered how many of these apparations were approved by the Church. A little Internet research proved to be very educational.
If the Church has a list of verified supernatural apparitions, I have yet to find it. Various groups have published lists, but they are not all in agreement. I found anywhere from 10 to 14 approved Marian apparitions in the twentieth century. Writing only from memory now, it seems like five or six reported apparitions are commonly listed as approved supernatural phenomena, but beyond those, lists varied. Part of the reason may be the way apparitions are classified. Studied apparitions may be classified as "not worthy of belief," "not contrary to the Faith," or "worthy of belief." They may also be termed as supernatural occurrences, that is, not of natural or demonic origin. Those compiling the various lists may be looking at numerous pastoral statements given over a period of time, which could account for some of the confusion.
From the information provided in the videos we watched, many of the apparitions contained similarities. The visionaries are often young people, children, humble and innocent. The Marian messages usually call for prayer, fasting, repentance, conversion, rejection of sin, and the more recent ones for an end to abortion. They sometimes foretell of miraculous signs and chastisement for those who do not heed God’s message. Some messages would seem to indicate these events will take place very soon. Of course, these are all private revelations and not necessarily messages to be accepted by everyone. Yet, even the unapproved apparition stories appeared quite convincing.
Our video series on apparitions was happening at the same time the Barrack Obama abortion controversy was taking place at Notre Dame. (See last month’s blog entry.) Those protesting Obama being given an honorary degree by Notre Dame staged massive prayer vigils for an end to abortion. This got me to wondering why Our Blessed Mother appears to innocent children, asking them to deliver her message, rather than appearing to the perpetrators of the sin themselves. I went to Eucharistic Adoration on the morning of Obama’s speech at Notre Dame, “suggesting” to Our Lord and His Blessed Mother that a well-timed apparition during his talk would be a really effective means of getting the President’s attention. Obviously, God has a better idea as the apparition did not happen as far as I know. Of course, even if it had, the liberal media probably would not have reported it.
A week has passed since Obama’s appearance. If Father Jenkins has experienced any reprimand for giving an honorary degree to an abortion friendly president, it has not been reported. I rather expected the controversy to subside after the ceremony with no action taken. So far, that seems to be the case. Perhaps, the Blessed Mother could pay him a visit too!
May is traditionally the month during which we Catholics give particular honor to our Blessed Mother. Our parish had a procession and crowning of the statue of Mary on Mother’s Day. We are also showing Marian videos in the parish hall on Monday and Wednesday evenings during May. Our pastor, Father Terry, asked me to preview the videos and set them up for showing at the scheduled times. I also make the popcorn.
The topic this month has centered on Marian apparitions, especially those of the twentieth century. I was familiar with Fatima, but many of the other reported apparitions were new to me. Among those were Garabandal (Spain), Betania (Venezuela), Kibeho (Africa), and Akita (Japan). Always being a bit skeptical, I wondered how many of these apparations were approved by the Church. A little Internet research proved to be very educational.
If the Church has a list of verified supernatural apparitions, I have yet to find it. Various groups have published lists, but they are not all in agreement. I found anywhere from 10 to 14 approved Marian apparitions in the twentieth century. Writing only from memory now, it seems like five or six reported apparitions are commonly listed as approved supernatural phenomena, but beyond those, lists varied. Part of the reason may be the way apparitions are classified. Studied apparitions may be classified as "not worthy of belief," "not contrary to the Faith," or "worthy of belief." They may also be termed as supernatural occurrences, that is, not of natural or demonic origin. Those compiling the various lists may be looking at numerous pastoral statements given over a period of time, which could account for some of the confusion.
From the information provided in the videos we watched, many of the apparitions contained similarities. The visionaries are often young people, children, humble and innocent. The Marian messages usually call for prayer, fasting, repentance, conversion, rejection of sin, and the more recent ones for an end to abortion. They sometimes foretell of miraculous signs and chastisement for those who do not heed God’s message. Some messages would seem to indicate these events will take place very soon. Of course, these are all private revelations and not necessarily messages to be accepted by everyone. Yet, even the unapproved apparition stories appeared quite convincing.
Our video series on apparitions was happening at the same time the Barrack Obama abortion controversy was taking place at Notre Dame. (See last month’s blog entry.) Those protesting Obama being given an honorary degree by Notre Dame staged massive prayer vigils for an end to abortion. This got me to wondering why Our Blessed Mother appears to innocent children, asking them to deliver her message, rather than appearing to the perpetrators of the sin themselves. I went to Eucharistic Adoration on the morning of Obama’s speech at Notre Dame, “suggesting” to Our Lord and His Blessed Mother that a well-timed apparition during his talk would be a really effective means of getting the President’s attention. Obviously, God has a better idea as the apparition did not happen as far as I know. Of course, even if it had, the liberal media probably would not have reported it.
A week has passed since Obama’s appearance. If Father Jenkins has experienced any reprimand for giving an honorary degree to an abortion friendly president, it has not been reported. I rather expected the controversy to subside after the ceremony with no action taken. So far, that seems to be the case. Perhaps, the Blessed Mother could pay him a visit too!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)