Ubi Petrus

Whew. I just notice that it had been almost a week between posts. Between work, illness and a certain fifth birthday this has been a crazy time. But fear not, dear reader (there must be some of you out there!) I’ll not let this long delay happen again if I can help it. Please consider this an opportunity to tell me on which subjects you’d like to hear more of my pontificating. I’ve been fairly conservative (from a selection point of view) on what I’ve blogged on thus far, but I get the feeling that may go by the wayside soon – serious times, and serious subjects, require serious responses.

Ryan Anderson just posted at First Things a very insightful, albeit depressing, review of the gay adoption situation in England and its station as a portent of things to come in the rest of the Western world. To paraphrase Fr. Neuhaus’ prophetic statement, “Neuhaus’ Law”, what is immoral today will be made mandatory by law tomorrow. From the post:

This example from England shows that the debate over same-sex marriage affects much more than just who can get a marriage license. In a fascinating essay in the Weekly Standard, Maggie Gallagher warns of the coming political and legal train wreck. The stance that the government takes toward same-sex marriage will have implications not only for state marriage law but much else—including religious liberty. Legal moralists on the left won’t have it any other way.

Train wreck, indeed. Beware the light at the end of the tunnel…

Jimmy akin shuts the door on the question of laity preaching the homily with his post here. If you’ve run into this problem, Jimmy provides just about all the resources you’ll need to be fully informed on the issue. Thankfully this, too, seems to be going the way of the dodo, albeit slowly.

Since Amy already has posted the patristic reading from this morning’s Office of Readings thereby beating me to my usual source of inspiration, I thought I’d give you the reflection from St. Josemaría Escrivá in the little booklet from Midwest Theological Forum entitled Praying the Rosary with St. Josemariá Escrivá (you can buy it from MTF here or Amazon here– it’s all of $1 or $2). It’s classic Escrivá:

When the time has come for the mother’s purification, in accordance with the Law of Moses, the Child must be taken to Jerusalem to be presented to the Lord (Lk 2:22).

And this time it will be you, my friend, who carries the cage with the doves (Lk 2:24).

Just think: She – Mary Immaculate! – submits to the Law as if she were defiled.

Through this example, foolish child, won’t you learn to fulfill the holy law of God regardless of any personal sacrifice?

Purification! You and I certainly do need purification.

Atonement and, more than atonement, love. Love as a searing iron to cauterize our soul’s uncleanness, and as a fire to kindle with divine flames the wretchedness of our hearts.

An upright and devout man has come to the Temple, led by the Holy Spirit (it has been revealed to him that he would not die until he has set eyes on the Christ). He takes the Messiah into his arms and says: “Now, my Lord, you can let your servant go from this world in peace, just as you promised, because my eyes have seen the Savior” (Lk 2:25-30).

Prompted on by this post at WDTPRS, more so honestly by the comments thereto, I’m going to brain dump on the whole “status of the motu proprio” issue. What are my hidden sources, my gnosis? Nada, just purely reading the temporal tea leaves combined with a personal study of things RatzingerBenedict, particularly his books (forward hint: this post gives you an idea of part of my theory) but also his speeches, a sprinkling of his Angelus addresses, homilies and so forth.

So, now that you’re surely foaming at the mouth with anticipation, what’s this great theory I intend to unload on all of St. Blogs? Simply that Benedict has approached everything in his pontificate through a hermeneutic of unity and that this unity is the lens through which he has viewed his duties. Looking at some of his audiences and his visits – including Archbishop Rowan Williams and his visit in Turkey to the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I – clearly shows he is very affected by the prayer of our Lord, “that they may all be one; even as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.” (John 17:21) But before anyone gets going, he has also made clear in his reaction to the Assisi gatherings in 1986 and 2002 (“this cannot be the model”, he is quoted as saying) that unchecked and uncritical ecumenism that rapidly descends to syncretism is not anywhere in his realm of interest. Far from his mind is the “I’m okay, you’re okay, your faith is as good as mine, let’s sing Kumbaya” type of ecumenism that ran rampant in the confusion after Nostra Aetate and Unitatis Redintegratio. No, he is working – and the good reader will note that he is working, not just hoping – for a true unity that comes from proper recognition of Truth.

Well that’s all fine and dandy, you’re surely saying, but what does that have to do with the motu proprio? For the answer we need only turn back the clock to 1968, to the release of, and reaction to, Humanae Vitae. I’m sure some think I’ve gone off my rocker, to be tying Humanae Vitae, a document with far-reaching ramifications to a document which “simply” allows the free (or perhaps even just “more free”) celebration of a rite which is already free and not abolished. I assure you, many are the time when one will be correct in asserting I’ve had my proverbial screw turn loose, but this is not one of them. For what was the impact of this document and its reception on the Church? Rampant dissension, open mockery and a near-schism that effectively shuttered a papacy. Why? Because large numbers of bishops and clergy were simply not on board with the teaching and were not reminded of before, nor informed of after, its promulgation that dissent on this issue was simply a bridge too far. We have lived with this near, some would argue de-facto, schism for nearly forty years now and only with the passing of a generation does it show any signs of healing.

But before I tie it all together, there is one more issue to bring in. Perhaps the singularly most disappointing and distressing event in the time spent at the head of the CDF by then-Cardinal Ratzinger was his dealings with Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre. When Pope John Paul II issued Ecclesia Dei and declared Archbishop Lefebvre and his followers to be in schism, Cardinal Ratzinger saw the sour fruit of his failed attempts at reconciliation turn into the bitterest of wine. I would make the supposition that he intends to expend whatever effort and energy necessary to ensure such a schism does not happen again on his watch.

“A schism over the liturgy?” I hear mumbled. Sounds kind of crazy, doesn’t it? But I’m not talking about the Catholic-Orthodox kind of schism with reciprocal excommunications. I’m talking about the same type of “soft schism” as has been endured ever since Humanae Vitae and the Truce of 1968. This time, however, with the background of 1968 still fresh in peoples’ memories, another direct attack on Papal authority (and, indirectly, on episcopal collegiality) likely with several bishops (c.f. the French Bishops’ response to the idea of the motu proprio) backing it would force another face off that this time may not be resolvable with any kind of truce, even one as favorable as that of 1968. So yes, this “soft schism” would have the potential to become “hard” quickly if its instigators want to push the issue.

In this light, it begins to make sense that the Pope would take his time to gently convince those who have come out against the motu proprio that it is the right thing to do and to help understand and allay their fears. We already heard some evidence of this happening when the Pope made a certain phone call. He seems to practice the ancient art of quietly but firmly allowing others to realize they simply are wrong and to find a way to bow out of the discussion with some semblance of their ego intact. The phone call was a start – I have the feeling he is now allowing those who raised a ruckus over this issue an opportunity to quietly move on to other topics before being shut down. And in the end, the best fight is one where you don’t have to.

Finally, there is also the issue of the Post-Synodal Exhortation on the Eucharist. The Church has been waiting on this for what seems to be a very long time to some (yours truly included). If, however, the Pope is utilizing this opportunity to clear up some misunderstandings (intentional or otherwise) and some of the liturgical, homiletical and theological malpractice that has been thrust upon us by “those who know better” it would make eminent sense to make sure these two documents work in harmony to improve the liturgical lives of those who attend both rites. Allowing the free celebration of the Pian Rite while allowing the continued misuse of the Pauline Rite does not fully serve the purpose, nor does its fixing the latter in lieu of the former. It does, however, present that much more difficulty in ensuring acceptance, even grudging if necessary, across the board.

I don’t think the gentle nudging and explicating is over just yet. My belief is the Pope is working calmly and gently behind the scenes to make sure everyone knows the way things are going to go and that their acquiescence if not their outright support is expected. Kind of like getting that silent “look” from a grandparent who is normally very easy-going – if you’re getting “the look” you know you’re out of line and nothing more need be said.

I’d be more than willing to wager that he does not release either document until he feels sure they will contribute to greater unity across the entirety of the Catholic Church since, if I read him correctly, that is something he finds as his great
challenge as Pope. Who would ever have thought a Rottweiler was a sheep dog?

(For those of you, who had the instant reaction of “Yes we can!” no, this isn’t a Bob the Builder post. Gotcha.) Michael at NLM makes a very striking and yet simple statement:

This brings to mind an immense challenge as we try to reform the sacred music of the Church. What do we do to restore the treasury of music to a pride of place not only within the four walls of a church building, but also within the souls of the faithful? It seems to me that there is no easy answer for this and that the solutions that seem likely to work are apt to meet with heavy resistance and require a lot of patience, such as teaching children from very young ages so that they associate chant with church, and sticking with the repertoire even if it doesn’t “take” in the first year, fifth year, or even tenth year. We also need to be writing new music that is clearly indebted to the traditional music of the past. Nevertheless, this is a problem from which we must not shrink, for if someday every Mass is sung with Gregorian chant and yet the people are not edified by it, then ultimately we have lost.

I’ve often thought of suggesting to either our pastor or the choral director that there are many in our parish who would be most inspired and grateful should we hear occasional pieces of truly Catholic music at Mass. The only thing that holds me back is that I’m pretty sure the director has little-to-no interest in Gregorian chant and probably little in Palestrina. But Michael’s point is even more incisive – even if I were to make this request and they were willing to do so but no one was edified I would have done nothing. The re-introduction of proper music must be done properly, gradually, without the shock of the guitar-and-tambourine folk music that seemed to have sprinted onto the stage not so long ago. My gut tells me if it’s introduced slowly and equally importantly performed well then people will suddenly find they feel “home” and maybe even those who think they come to church to be entertained will find deeper meaning than the surface enjoyment they’ve come to associate with Mass. Then again, I’m a closet optimist, so who knows.

So my question remains. How do you help to ensure your kids are learning to appreciate chant? I’m talking methods and hard, cold strategies here. Just telling them to like it and forcing it on them isn’t going to work. And let us not forget, I have utterly no skill when it comes to singing (I played trumpet through the fifth or sixth grade, but that’s about it) so coming at it from a technical perspective is nigh impossible. If you suggest talking to the children’s choir director that’s fine as well (when my kids are old enough for that) but experience in dealing with, and convincing, initially intransigent directors would be more helpful. I’m at the level of most of us out here – I know good music “when I hear it” but I couldn’t argue with someone at a technical level. So…help me out, and maybe others too.

It’s simply not possible. It’s simply not, I tell you. But yet, there it is. And no, I didn’t cheat and re-take the test or anything like that. It’s actually a humbling experience to get a good score on even something as simple as this when it only reinforces how much you don’t know. Go ahead and take it, it’s fun! H/T to Curt Jester.

Chris Blosser has posted a helpful handful of links on Saint Thomas Aquinas. While his impact on the Church and on theology in general cannot be overstated many find him, to be generous, tough sledding. But since one of the greatest gifts we have is our ability to learn, the resources page Chris offers here is invaluable. I confess to having failed to work my way through the Summa and have thus far put off continuing to try due to an ever-increasing “to-be-read” pile on my desk. Maybe these links will provide the spurt of energy to get me going. If you have any other great resources, do let me know. One can never have too much help when reading the masters.

From the reading of Morning Prayer in the Liturgy of the Hours:

I have appeared to you to designate you as my servant and as a witness to what you have seen of me and what you will see of me. I have delivered you from this people and from the nations, to open the eyes of those to whom I am sending you, to turn them from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God; that through their faith in me they may obtain the forgiveness of their sins and a portion among God’s people. (Acts 26:16b-18)

What a call! What a weight! And yet, St. Paul turns on his spiritual heel and begins to follow this commission that has since probably seen no equal. This, to me, approaches equivalent weight to “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” It’s also a microcosm of conversion in any case – first you are informed, then you are converted. Sometimes it’s instantaneous, sometimes the lag between step 1 and step 2 is well nigh to forever. St. Paul, pray for us!
(Image from catholicculture.org.)

Fr. Z outdoes me by a long shot with his patristiblogging of Paul’s conversion.