Catholic Sensibility

AA 20 treats it: Many decades ago the laity in many nations began to dedicate themselves increasingly to the apostolate. They grouped themselves into various kinds of activities and societies which, while maintaining a closer union with the hierarchy, pursued and continue to pursue goals which are properly apostolic. Getting results was important: there, bishops took notice ... These societies were deservedly recommended and promoted by the popes and many bishops, from whom they received the title of "Catholic Action," and were often described as the collaboration of the laity in the apostolate of the hierarchy. Yes, that would fit: defining an apostolate in terms of ordination, not baptism. What else? A list for these organizations: - Their purpose is evangelization and sanctification. Note the latter is also one of the two main purposes of worship. - Cooperating with the hierarchy. Of course. - Unity within the organization, so as to reflect the "community of the Church." - The hierarchy retains a certain oversight: "the laity function under the higher direction of the hierarchy itself, and the latter can sanction this cooperation by an explicit mandate." I've thought lay organizations would benefit more from cross-fertilization than the input of the hierarchy, whose experience in particular apostolates if often quite limited. But it's a tough challenge, even within lay circles. When I was in the archdiocese of Dubuque, I suggested more intermix among professional organizations of lay ministers: catechists, pastoral associates, liturgy, youth people, etc.. It never seemed to get people excited. But it wasn't as if we didn't share some common concerns.

Brigid might have me confused with somebody else who does this sort of thing, but I'm in a blogging mood on lunch break, so what the heck ... We have a new priest in the parish, a Jesuit returned to family roots in the KC area, so I was watching his Masses to assess his speaking ability (a tad too fast for our large echo-ey church) and his microphone use (he tried out our earpiece/flesh-colored mini-mic, but it fell off). This is a challenge: trying to tell a guy who's likely preached and presided using his voice this way for forty-plus years. If I don't, I'll get more of the six or seven people that came up to me complaining after those two Masses. So I got to do music with my ensemble, two of whom were fresh off their triumphant concert Friday night. Three singers were absent, one on the highway dealing with a blowout, one at home with a family thing, and one off with a girlfriend whose father just died. Singer number one meant I got to sing lead on "Freedom Is Coming," which was an interesting switch from singing with the altos on the tenor line. We learned they rely too much on me. With a really great small singing ensemble, everybody should be confident and independent enough to sing their part no matter what. Singer number two was missed. She's the least experienced of the bunch, never having sung in any kind of choir, but she's an unrealized talent and a superb blender. Losing singer number three might've improved our blending. Another talented person, but likes to sing the way he feels it. What can I say about repertoire? Probably nothing spectacular. We did "Praise To The Lord" well. It had a nice baroque feel to it. I just love having a violinist and a good guitarist who can do things with style. A group member really, really wanted to do "You Raise Me Up," so I arranged it for violin, flute, and three parts (men on melody and soprano and alto on a refrain harmony). Though they went well enough, the other congregational songs, "We Have Been Told" (Haas's imitation of Haugen's "Eye Has Not Seen") and Haugen's "Let Justice Roll" don't do much for me. On the former, we did the three-part singing effectively, using the refrain a cappella as the introduction. But the song just doesn't seem to wear well over the years. The latter hangs on in the parish repertoire, but people don't sing it as enthusiastically as "We Are Called" or a few other "justice" songs. I came back to work with the youth at Sunday 5PM. This is the choir for whom I held our former director's job over the summer only to have her resign after the first week back. The YM and I are looking for someone to build and lead a weekly choir, but no luck on the search as of yet. My young friend Katie sang by herself pretty much. She did really well on the Gloria and the psalm, and three or four parishioners told her so after Mass. So did I, but parishioner commentary helps, too. After Brittany praised her, I told Katie, "See? All ages approve of you!" This week, my wife and I get to do All Souls on Wednesday morning. Next Tuesday is First Reconciliation. Thanksgiving is not too far ahead. And I still have to figure out how to apportion our eight Christmas Masses now that neither youth choir director will be available for the holiday this year. And o yes, I have Midnight Mass to think about, too. For the past six or seven years (at least) that's been a pick-up tradition here. I know it will be good, but somebody has to pick me up for it first.

There are typos, and then there are spelling errors consistently made. I'm always amused at how conservative St Bloggers continue to misspell the LA cardinal's name. It's almost as though the only thing they ever read about him is the gall bladder product other conservatives write on their blogs. If you care about liturgical rubrics, you should care about spelling. Hint: M--A--H--O--N--Y No "e." Grok?

Trust me: it really is a myth. FrMichael in the comment box below asked about the "Federation of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions, NAPM, magazines like Worship and Ministry & Liturgy, the BCL, diocesan liturgists, NPM, OCP, GIA, LTP, and the like" being a figment of his imagination. They're not imaginary, though the perception of their power might be. The publishers listed have financial clout to a degree, but no more than OSV, Ligouri, Ignatius Press, or any of the youth or catechetical publishing vehicles. All of those operations generally dwarf the largest of the liturgy outfits. And if catechesis is your post-conciliar bugaboo, I'm afraid to say the liturgy folks are little better than bit players in this drama. In fact, it's often hard to get the liturgy and catechesis people on the same page. It's tough for liturgy people, too. We're mostly artists. We have strong opinions on stuff. I've been to the week-long conferences and workshops often enough to see the chinks in the armor of liberal unity. Liturgists infight more than Democrats. And that says a lot. "You are right in that the majority of liturgical decisions in a parish are made "in a vacuum" by priests. That vacuum exists because most priests are are educated by seminary liturgy profs fully immersed in the liturgical establishment." If so, these folks are fully supported by the seminary rector and bishops. But even among liturgy scholars, there is quite a difference of opinion on stuff: enough of a difference to engender debate in scholarly circles and give evidence in the wide variety of liturgical styles in parishes. You have Benedictine liturgy and Notre Dame liturgy and a bit of San Anselmo. You have musicians trained in a lot of ecumenical settings who align along a slightly different axis. And you have pastors and musicians likely trained at different places who will bring their own cocktail of worship style to the parish Masses. Then everybody has their own personal styles: what they will concede, and what they will never allow. Then you have at least a dozen homiletic services, most of which give you a host of ritual and music suggestions. Then as FrMichael reports, we have "Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (sic), Adoremus, and pre-conciliar texts to get a taste of the broader Roman liturgical tradition." If I had to pick a term for this, I'd say it looks more like a diaspora than an establishment. Maybe the diaspora is united in being anti-Tridentine, but it would be hard to say it's united in being anti-Latin. Taize has been very vogue for twenty years: an example of international gatherings in Latin long before the synod bishops caught on to the idea. "Unfortunately, in my observation most seminarians are too lazy to do outside research and are happy to make do with what they learn in class. For the most part, they are "heads full of mush" when it comes to liturgy, to quote a famous radio talkshow host." Yes. Most priests I know, therefore most seminarians (I presume), do not have liturgy as their area of passion or specialty. That's one reason why liturgists are hired in parishes. Even more parishes hire a musician of sorts. Most of those musicians, especially the one in smaller parishes, tend to have their own assortment of tastes, experiences, education, etc.. I do think that the vernacular/contemporary "cult" (if you will) has taken root in most parishes, not because it's been imposed by a liturgical cabal of publishers and organizations, but because the post-conciliar reform was embraced by most American Catholics. For the most part, that embrace has continued, supplemented by priests and lay people with more or less training, with a wide variety of experiences, and which has continued to be found fruitful by the majority of parishioners, despite the quibbles about style or personality. As for the publishers, it's become a market-driven thing. If Adoremus really thought the people were just longing for their hymnal, they'd pour money into a massive publicity campaign for parishes to buy their products, especially once the new Ordo Missae is published. I could be wrong, but I don't think anything like that will happen. FrMichael's sources will remain on the periphery, with a solid, loyal, but small clientele. Part of a wider catholicity.

John Allen relates an interview with Bishop Donald Wuerl on the synod's biggest "non-issue." JA: A synod is sometimes as important for what it doesn't say as for what it does. How do you interpret the near-total silence on the old Latin Mass? DW: I believe the fact that this did not surface, that it was not a part of our discussions, means that it's a settled issue. I was reminded of a story a pastor told me about a 12-year-old who was talking with his parent, and the parent was talking about the beauty of the Latin Mass. The 12-year-old responded, 'But we've always done Mass this way!' Three generations have come and gone since the transition into the vernacular, and I think by now it's no longer really an issue. JA: Does this mean there will be no 'universal indult' for celebration of the pre-Vatican II Mass? DW: I don't know where that might be going. It's a very specific response to a specific case. On the level of overall principle for the whole church all these years after the close of the council, however, I think the question of language and liturgy has been answered. … The overall perspective of the synod is that Vatican II brought about a renewal and reform of the liturgy that, historically speaking, has been embraced by the church universal. That doesn't mean by everybody, of course, but by the church universal. Much is made that the use of Latin has been reaffirmed by synodal decree. But then again, it was the least popular of all the points put forth in the final draft of proposals. If I were a bishop, I could see myself voting for it in some form. What does it mean? I think the Latin-Tridentine crowd is vastly overrepresented in St Blog's groupthink. One mention in three weeks for the indult Mass is hardly anything. It's clear no universal indult is coming, not with the bishops weighing in so heavily to support and reinforce Vatican II reforms. I'm thinking that even posting on this gives the issue too much visibility. Meanwhile, the Catholic Right continues to feel the drain of sedevacantists and other fringe groups who want to separate themselves from Rome, from their Catholic neighbors, and everybody in between. My suggestion for my conservative friends: don't get caught on the outside looking in. The Church still needs your sensibilities for tradition, preservation, beauty, and the challenges needed to keep the reform honest. Ditch the "reform of the reform" silly talk. The liturgy is in need of reform. Period. If it weren't, people wouldn't be so fired-up passionate about the possibilities we're missing. Get with the program, and if others want to jump on the bandwagon of Pope Pius XIII, it's their choice.

My friends Diana and Bob gave a concert last night. They're members of the small choir & ensemble that sings at our parish's 9AM Sunday Mass. But I've never had a chance to see their concert performance. It was outstanding, and the magic between them on many of the songs was obvious. They keep their concert persona under tight wraps at church, but it was really cool to see them let loose and ham things up. The concert was a good mix of the political and the romantic; just the way a liberal likes it. Diana started the second set with a version of "At Last." Always liked that song. My wife likes it even more. Brit fell asleep during the second set. She didn't want to take a nap yesterday, insisting on playing soccer instead. So she and her dad had a backyard battle of Team Panther versus Team Teaser. Team Teaser is certainly feeling his muscles today. Despite the soreness, yesterday was indeed a good day, musical and sporting, friendly and all. And I didn't even need to go online to have fun. Imagine!

The Conditional Apology

Have you noticed them? They usually begin, "If I have offended someone ..."Air Force football coach Fisher DeBerry was understandably upset about losing 48-10 to TCU last weekend. He said the opposing school "had a lot more Afro-American players than we did and they ran a lot faster than we did."

A predictable furor erupted. DeBerry said yesterday, "I realize the things I said might have been hurtful to many people and I want everyone to understand that I never intended to offend anyone."

Check this link for a summary.

Why is it so hard to just say, "I realize the things I said were hurtful to many people," and go from there? It's almost as though the apology is put into a sort of relativistic space capsule, and the person hedges by convincing themselves, "I wouldn't have been offended, and the universe is me, so I'm just saying this bit to save my butt." I look upon it as a finger-crossing behind one's back thing. Childish, but predictable.

DeBerry might've insulted a lot of people other than pc blacks, by the way. What if TCU's Gary Patterson is just a better coach than DeBerry? What if Patterson's a better recruiter of players and assistants? What if the Air Force Academy is more focused on recruiting good officer candidates than good football players?

Why can't an apology be unconditional?

Will Ozzie Be Next?

Now that Miers has withdrawn from consideration, that's the question.

The Miers nomination has the whiff of being a Bush choice all the way. It seems like it was a choice the president insisted upon and nobody in his circle was willing to take him aside and say, "Mr President, uh, we have some big problems with this one ..."

I have to say this has gone beyond partisan politics. I'm feeling genuinely embarassed about my government for the first time since post-election 2000. For the sake of the country, I sure hope this executive branch can get its act together. It's like seeing the Yankees lose 33-0.

Pardon this partially formed thought, but as I was digesting one of Rock's recent posts, the discussion steered in part into how NPR ignores stories of persecuted Catholics in the world. Why, it was asked, do some news outlets seem ever ready to tarnish the Church's image with stories about ex-priests and former nuns and other things. The Fresh Air program in question is here. I know I've blogged about this in the past, but maybe it's a notion worth resuscitating. Maybe a sports image will be helpful in this regard. Last year in baseball, Yankee haters worldwide (I count myself as one) were probably as delirious over the Red Sox comeback in the ALCS as Sox fans themselves. It couldn't have happened to a nicer team, to get humiliated like that: being the very first to blow a 3-0 MLB playoff series lead. Mind you, I didn't start screaming out my living room window about it. I didn't light Yankee jerseys on fire in my front yard. But admittedly, I wasn't too concerned about the tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of innocent (relatively) kid-Yankee-lovers who, through no fault of their own, just watched their beloved team (no less beloved than the teams I root for) dismantled and tossed on the post-season trash heap of infamy. Some twelve-year-old boy went to bed in tears after the ALCS game seven last year clueless as to why most baseball fans were cheering that night--cheering against him. Media coverage of the Catholic Church strikes me as something akin to this. The Catholic Church, justified or not, is perceived as being wealthy, powerful, arrogant, controlling, prideful, stodgy, and secretive. The twelve-year-old in the Bronx doesn't remember all twenty-six World Series triumphs. But everybody else does. Bill Clinton was a phenomenal politician and a supremely gifted man who frittered away his presidency. Bashing Bill was a sport not so much because he deserved it (which he mostly did) but because he was successful. The media takes to Michael Jackson, OJ, Tom Cruise, or Martha Stewart in the same way. It seems we like our heroes to be big, only so their collapse is more spectacular than the average Joe tripping on the sidewalk. Other baseball teams are owned by silly old rich men who interfere in their teams. It might be said that Peter Angelos has done more damage to the Orioles than Steinbrenner to the Yankees. But Big George gets the press. Why? Because it's New York and we hate the Yankees and the Orioles haven't done diddly since the 80's. Embarassing stories about the Catholic Church are more newsworthy because of the Church's perceived power. If Catholics are martyred in Indonesia or Africa, it doesn't compute in the minds of John Q. Public. JQP wants to hear news that reinforces his worldview, not news that challenges it. Martyred Catholics won't sell cars, toothpaste or Levitra. But powerful priests and bishops taking a fall or people thumbing their noses at the hierarchy will sell thfor the sponsors. It's my take that media coverage of the sex and cover-up scandals was of the same make and model as media trashing of priesidents, entertainers, and other celebrities gone bad. Martha Stewart, for example, could give PR lessons to the US bishops, if they bothered to ask. So I don't get bothered than everybody seems to be against us. I'm certainly not going to work myself into a persecution complex over it. It's just not worth the energy.

EWTN and CWN fumble this one. The E's headline:

VATICAN RELEASES NOTE BARRING DEACONS, LAITY FROM ADMINISTERING LAST RITES

Picking up a Catholic World News story the Vatican's been sitting on for eight months: "A Vatican document that was approved in February, indicating that only priests should administer the last rites, was made public on October 21." A few things ... St Blog's Catholics whine and wince when the secular media can't get the Catholic stuff straight. Just for the record: - The sacrament of the anointing of the sick is not last rites, though a dying person may be anointed. - Communion for the dying is called viaticum. And a question about this "friendly reminder" ... why did the Vatican sit on this for eight months? It's not really as if deacons and lay people don't know about the restrictions on presiders for these sacraments. I understand conservatives want their own churchspeak just like the liberals, but sheesh, at least get your sacraments straight when you invent your own lingo. This is embarassing.

AA19 sets forth some sobering considerations to balance a free ranging approach. First, associations must put the spiritual well-being of members foremost, even above the particular apostolate(s) itself: Among these associations, those which promote and encourage closer unity between the concrete life of the members and their faith must be given primary consideration. Associations are not ends unto themselves; rather they should serve the mission of the Church to the world. And an interesting thing: Their apostolic dynamism depends on their conformity with the goals of the Church as well as on the Christian witness and evangelical spirit of every member and of the whole association. Not solum magisterium, I'd say. Think international, AA says, for three reasons: - the progress of social institutions - the fast-moving pace of modern society - the global nature of the Church's mission And a conclusion: Maintaining the proper relationship to Church authorities, the laity have the right to found and control such associations and to join those already existing. Yet the dispersion of efforts must be avoided. This happens when new associations and projects are promoted without a sufficient reason, or if antiquated associations or methods are retained beyond their period of usefulness. Nor is it always fitting to transfer indiscriminately forms of the apostolates that have been used in one nation to other nations.

People are naturally social. Recognizing that, AA notes God has naturally emphasized that in the plan of salvation: "... it has pleased God to unite those who believe in Christ into the people of God (cf. 1 Peter 2:5-10) and into one body (cf. 1 Cor. 12:12). The group apostolate of Christian believers then happily corresponds to a human and Christian need and at the same time signifies the communion and unity of the Church in Christ, who said, "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them" (Matt. 18:20)." AA18 continues, stating the realms of family, parish, and diocese have both formal and informal efforts. The two (or more) heads are better than one principle is at work: For the associations established for carrying on the apostolate in common sustain their members, form them for the apostolate, and rightly organize and regulate their apostolic work so that much better results can be expected than if each member were to act on his own. Committees aren't mentioned, but: In the present circumstances, it is quite necessary that, in the area of lay activity, the united and organized form of the apostolate be strengthened. In fact, only the pooling of resources is capable of fully achieving all the aims of the modern apostolate and firmly protecting its interests. And adaptability is a virtue: Here it is important that the apostolate encompass even the common attitudes and social conditions of those for whom it is designed. Otherwise those engaged in the apostolate are often unable to bear up under the pressure of public opinion or of social institutions. Nothing much else comes to mind in the comment category for me. How about you?

Author and blogger Chet Raymo sensibly weighs in on biologist Robin Allshire writing a retraction for an earlier scientific paper, admitting no one, not even his own laboratory, has been able to duplicate the results of the original experiment. Raymo concludes: When we see the first peer-reviewed experimental data supporting intelligent design or astrology that is reproducible in other laboratories by skeptics and believers alike, then these hypotheses can make a legitimate claim to being sciences. When we see the first published retraction, we will know that intelligent design or astrology has reached maturity as a science. It's a good definition, but I'm not holding my breath for maturity coming along any time soon. ID is not science. As such, I don't necessarily have a problem with its inclusion in a curriculum, but not in a science curriculum.

From my bulletin column last week: A change for Eucharistic Ministers: you’ve noticed it. I wanted to take some column space to explain it. In 2003, we revised Communion procedures to be in accord with the latest General Instruction on the Roman Missal (GIRM), the book that instructs parishes how to celebrate the Mass. The section in question (#162) reads as follows: “(Lay) ministers should not approach the altar before the priest has received Communion, and they are always to receive from the hands of the priest celebrant the vessel containing either species of the Most Holy Eucharist for distribution to the faithful.”

In his directive to parishes this past summer, which you may have read in the Catholic Key, Bishop Finn chose to interpret this passage more strictly, instructing that lay Eucharistic Ministers should “enter the sanctuary after the priest has received Communion ….” So the adjustment we’ve made is for Eucharistic Ministers to wait on the carpet until the priest receives from the chalice, then enter the sanctuary, where all other procedures continue as usual. Does this mean lay people are less-valued in the eyes of God? Not at all. Are these procedures that all-fired important? Yes and no. Procedures are important in the sense that they provide a framework for people to serve others at Mass and, for the sake of organization, they permit duties to be carried out with less distraction. In another sense, we cannot let ourselves get bogged down in details (with feelings of either dismay or triumph) and miss the bigger picture. Vatican II said it well: “... when the liturgy is celebrated, something more is required than the mere observation of the laws governing valid and licit celebration; … the faithful take part fully aware of what they are doing, actively engaged in the rite, and enriched by its effects.” Getting the procedure right isn’t the end of the job; it’s only square one. The real task is engaging people who come to Mass, helping them to full awareness, active engagement, and a spiritual enrichment for their lives. When procedures assist us in those ways, I support them. When they do not assist us toward these goals, we comply and then quickly move on to the more important things. For those dismayed by liturgy changes, I offer my open ear anytime, as well as the suggestion: let’s keep our eyes on the greater goal.

Dress Up

Fellow KC blogger Curmudgeon suggests that when you go to the symphony, "dress like you're going to the symphony. Don't people know how to dress anymore? There were only a smattering of sportcoats and ties out there, much less men in suits. What's the world coming to when open shirts outnumber ties 2 to 1 at a Saturday night symphony concert?"

I have to agree with my reactionary neighbor.

Brittany rolled her eyes last month when we went to the Friends of Chamber Music season opener and I said at 6:35, "Time to get dressed up!" I think the champagne and chocolates made up for it. The former for me, the latter for the women of the family.

As it is, I had forgotten I had highlighted that concert. I love the Rimsky-Korsakov Scheherazade. I have a good recording of it, and I play it somewhat frequently. My first favorite musical version of the storytelling princess on a stay of execution was this one by the outstanding and vastly underrated rock band Renaissance, fans of which can check out a substantial site here.

As it is I spent much of the evening playing Jumanji with Brit, then curling up with this book, reviewed here.

Enjoyed a hectic day: Children's Choir at 9AM, then our small adult choir went to our sister parish for 11AM Mass, St Louis as part of a choir/pulpit exchange, then back for the noon Mass at STM lickety split, for my scheduled sacristan was in a car accident a few days ago and my other regular was out of town. Then over for Jazz and Barbecue in the school aud, food provided by the St Louis Parish Men's Club.

Tonight, I finish Atonement and listen to more music. But I won't be wearing a suit and tie.

NASA is looking for more valuable property on the moon. Let's mine some oxygen.

The Liturgy Q&A section at Zenit is worth checking weekly. I get the impression most questioners have a bone to pick with someone, so they submit to this "Dear Abby of Liturgy" (Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University) for justification. This week: "I was under the impression that the priest 'may' add a prayer at the conclusion of the Prayers of the Faithful, but was not required to do so by the rubrics. In my parish, after the deacon concludes the prayers, the parish priest simply enunciates, 'Oremus.'" McNamara quotes GIRM 71: "It is for the priest celebrant to direct this prayer from the chair. He himself begins it with a brief introduction, by which he invites the faithful to pray, and likewise he concludes it with a prayer." He concludes, "it is clear that the priest should conclude the Prayer of the Faithful with a prayer. This prayer is said with hands extended as for the other presidential prayers." On first reading, I thought this treated with the practice of the presider adding prayers to the already-composed offerings. I've never known the general intercessions to be concluded by anything but a prayer. Sometimes, I stumble across a "communal" prayer like the Hail Mary or the diocesan vocations prayer. Those would be no-no's too, I guess.

Vatican II liturgical reform: "progressive and adequate" No universal indult, no expanded use, not even a priority. Seems right to me.

I'm chiming in late on this one. Father Walter Cuenin, pastor of a highly regarded Vatican II parish in Newton, Massachusetts, was asked to resign because of financial wrongdoing netting him something around the sum of $80,000. The parish finance council signed off on what seems not to have been a big secret. Cuenin also happened to be one of Cardinal Law's most outspoken critics when revelations of Boston's clergy sex abuse and cover-up scandal eventually knocked the archbishop over three-thousand miles out of his cathedra. The diocese's media organ weighs in on the charges. Cuenin's replacement was asked to consider an assignment there four months ago. Was the diocese fishing for retribution? I'm inclined to think not. Here's my take: Great pastors are a danger to their parishes. Their followers create a cult around them, elevating them high into the Communion of Saints even before the Vatican puts in their two euros worth. Vatican II parishes should be able to operate without a flinch when a new pastor is assigned. If it was all up to Cuenin to make this place go, it was little better than a Tridentine operation dressed in a progressive chasuble. Great pastors are a danger to themselves. I'd rather be persecuted than made a cult hero. There's far more spiritual danger when you have loyal followers farther than the eye can see. It's hard not believing some of the crap you can be fed. Cuenin may have believed he was accepting honest gifts from his parishioners with the extra auto mileage and the stipend for his sabbatical. A wise man would've turned it down. All of it. And made a point, politely, in doing so. Maybe it was Cuenin's time to go. Twelve years as a pastor: that's enough. Cuenin should've realized it and begun preparing his flock a year ago. If the diocese wasn't offering, Cuenin himself could've gone to Archbishop Sean and requested a transfer. The chancery doesn't get off scot-free though. Every diocese should have a plan for transferring pastors, and ensuring a smooth transition, especially when a well-regarded guy leaves town. They owe it to the priests coming and going to make the upheaval as stress-free and smiley-faced as possible. Smart diocesan people would've downplayed the financial mismanagement charges. Cuenin would've needed to have been caught in bed with a minor to sink lower in people's eyes than the diocesan bureaucracy. (And even then, it would be close.) The archbishop and his people should've realized a quickie transfer would be hard enough on the parishioners at Our Lady's without questioning Cuenin's judgment on finances. That they asked another priest to consider the assignment before the audit revealed impropriety shows it was on their minds. Better would be to announce a transfer date at least six months ahead and given Cuenin and the people a chance to enjoy a farewell tour. Cuenin seems to be the only one on the high road, and he was the one with his hand caught in the cookie jar. The diocese shoots itself in the foot again. The parishioners haven't grown up yet. I sure hope Coyne is ready for the job.

AA17 treats the situation of isolated Catholics: There is a very urgent need for this individual apostolate in those regions where the freedom of the Church is seriously infringed. In these trying circumstances, the laity do what they can to take the place of priests, risking their freedom and sometimes their life to teach Christian doctrine to those around them, training them in a religious way of life and a Catholic way of thinking, leading them to receive the sacraments frequently and developing in them piety, especially Eucharistic devotion. While the sacred synod heartily thanks God for continuing also in our times to raise up lay persons of heroic fortitude in the midst of persecutions, it embraces them with fatherly affection and gratitude.

The individual apostolate has a special field in areas where Catholics are few in number and widely dispersed. Here the laity who engage in the apostolate only as individuals, whether for the reasons already mentioned or for special reasons including those deriving also from their own professional activity, usefully gather into smaller groups for serious conversation without any more formal kind of establishment or organization, so that an indication of the community of the Church is always apparent to others as a true witness of love. In this way, by giving spiritual help to one another through friendship and the communicating of the benefit of their experience, they are trained to overcome the disadvantages of excessively isolated life and activity and to make their apostolate more productive.

In part, this section spoke to the reality of Catholics behind the Iron Curtain as well as scattered believers in mission lands. Today, internet communication and wider human settlement makes geographical isolation less of an imposed choice. I do think a substantial case exists that today's society produces more alienation and isolation, though we have a few more billion souls sharing the planet. I wonder how the council bishops would treat internet communications and their use among Catholics today. What seems to be a golden opportunity for sharing of information, resources, and faith, has instead become a battleground for competing ideologies. For all the complaints about Vatican II being poorly implemented or hijacked or coopted by the modern culture, it seems that particular fault has come back to haunt most all of us online. Instead of making our internet lives patterned on the saints, we choose instead our favorite media figure.

Homily Helps was popular enough, and maybe I have more to say about singers in churches. 1. Drink 16 glasses a water a day. Normal people need 8. Singers need at least double that, according to my wife's voice consultant. Before singing, be sure the water is room temperature; not hot or cold. Jesus doesn't like lukewarm, but your vocal cords do. 1b. Be sure to locate restrooms in unfamiliar churches before the opening song. 2. Cultivate a prayer life. Pray a psalm daily: these are the bedrock of your ministry. If you already do this, get a breviary besides and begin to pray morning and evening prayer, too. 3. Never use a microphone to drown out, enhance, or even assist the people's parts. A good organist or pianist can lead congregational singing without you. Your role is to be a minister of hospitality for the singing assembly. Oversinging into a microphone is like a party host keeping all the chips and dip to herself. Be polite. 4. If a microphone must be used, use it sparingly. The only items I can think of are psalm, alleluia, and communion verses, and the occasional litany. And if your church acoustics are great and you don't need amplification or if the setting is small and intimate, forego the electronics. 5. Know every hymn, psalm, and Mass setting in your parish's repertoire. Be sure you have a list from the parish liturgist or music director. Learn new pieces faithfully. 6. Ponder why you might seem to do far fewer infant baptisms than weddings and funerals and perhaps suggest to the liturgist it is time this sacrament had more musical honor in the parish. 7. Take voice lessons. 8. Attend concerts and study what the singers do. 9. Buy audio music of the great singers and study what they do. Be sure to include jazz, opera, and art songs as well as sacred music in your library. 10. Reflect on the readings in advance of every cantor assignment, even the funerals and weddings, if you can get the information. You are assisting others in singing the liturgy. You are not a hired gun to plop in with a musical dollop of your talent and zip out to the bank. Try to discern your singing as part of a larger ministry involving the worship of God and the sanctification of God's people. Live what you sing. Any additions?

Taking a quick look at AA 15 & 16 this morning... The Council states the obvious: The laity can engage in their apostolic activity either as individuals or together as members of various groups or associations. The individual apostolate, flowing generously from its source in a truly Christian life (cf. John 4:14), is the origin and condition of the whole lay apostolate, even of the organized type, and it admits of no substitute. The Council asks if one's life is a manifest sign of the gospel: There are many forms of the apostolate whereby the laity build up the Church, sanctify the world, and give it life in Christ. A particular form of the individual apostolate as well as a sign specially suited to our times is the testimony of the whole lay life arising from faith, hope, and charity. The Council suggests we have higher standards in our lives that are obvious to others: Furthermore, in collaborating as citizens of this world, in whatever pertains to the upbuilding and conducting of the temporal order, the laity must seek in the light of faith loftier motives of action in their family, professional, cultural, and social life and make them known to others when the occasion arises. Doing this, they should be aware of the fact that they are cooperating with God the creator, redeemer, and sanctifier and are giving praise to Him.

As I read this, it occurs to me that chanceries have not held themselves to this standard in dealing with the legal challenges of the day. Do Catholic lawyers compromise themselves as lay apostles by conducting legal cases on behalf of the Church with no clearly "loftier" motives?

Finally, the laity should vivify their life with charity and express it as best they can in their works.

Okay.

They should all remember that they can reach all men and contribute to the salvation of the whole world by public worship and prayer as well as by penance and voluntary acceptance of the labors and hardships of life whereby they become like the suffering Christ (cf. 2 Cor. 4:10; Col. 1:24).

"Offering it up" endorsed by Vatican II.

I was thinking of this whole section in light of the reviews I've read on John Allen's Opus Dei book. My wife has been busy with a crunch of classwork lately. She's also been feeling under the weather the past week or two. So I've been asked to feed the rabbits a few nights I'd rather go to bed early, slap in a cd and read my book. The bunnies are cute, but preparing their fresh greens and hay: these pets were my wife's idea and her project, not mine. I grumbled when I figured out how much we spend monthly in feeding these pets. But it's a good thing for me to consent, feed the prey (cats and dog are the "predators"), and even do so as I talk to them like Anita does.

I have a hard time seeing this as "suffering," though. It's a bother, and more of a small emotional one than anything grave. But I think I can benefit from carefully watching my attitude as I ... ick ... offer things up. Being in service to others in ministry puts me in a position of doing those extra things often enough. But directing my attitude as I do these things: there seems to lie the real challenge.

The Star thinks its newsworthy, but thanks to Rock, I've known for a few months. When I asked another diocesan priest about it, he said, "It's no secret. The bishop's spiritual director is with Opus Dei." Reporter Bill Tammeus is no favorite in some Catholic circles in town. The article linked above is reasonable. It tries to be a scoop, but it's really not. But it's generally fair, while having a whiff of its author being a bit out of the loop. I'm looking forward to reading John Allen's book about Opus Dei.

Everybody (it seems) has criticisms of the homily. Fewer have concrete suggestions for improvement. Here are some: 1. Pray daily with Scripture (outside the Lectionary selections and the Office). 2. Read literature: poetry, novels, plays, the speeches of others, not to mention the daily media. 3. Attend an occasional concert, play, or lecture. In addition to enjoyment, put on a student's hat and try to leave with at least one new insight as to your own public speaking. 4. If possible, occasionally record your homily on audio and video. Wince, watch, listen, and learn. 5. Consult other priests on homily topics and methods, especially the good preachers in the diocese. 6. Know what the parish wants to hear. Why, you might ask, to cater to them? Not at all. Simple communication theory: to meet the needs of the listener. If you are unaware of the wants (and needs) of the people, you might well be misunderstood in turn. Obviously, a skilled pastoral person will be able to leap from the parish's comfort zone and help guide the community's formation in the Gospel. But such guidance is most often a step by step proposition. 7. Read and absorb the USCCB document Fulfilled In Your Hearing. 8. When approaching the liturgy's readings for the first time, read them aloud and pray with them before doing anything else. 9. Take notes after this prayer time. 10. Keep at least three different Scripture commentaries in your office, preferably from different authors and viewpoints. Sometimes, it's helpful to have a small library that focuses on biblical themes, such as women, the Holy Spirit, justice, prayer, etc.. 11. Consult and use homily aids only after your homily is drafted. Incorporate the author's ideas into your homily, not yours into the published piece. 12. Begin to seek out people whom you can trust to give you substantial feedback on homilies. Loading up with detractors is especially helpful. Why? You will be able to trust their praise when they give it. For your supporters, you can probably only trust their criticisms. But it's important to find a balance of both. And if you can manage it, cultivate a group of insightful, thoughtful people who can keep you on track. I've hardly exhausted the good ideas here. Any more from the comment boxes?

The top shot shows Titan with its thick atmosphere, Dione passing, and Saturn's rings, nearly edge on. The little white bump on the ring centered on the image is Prometheus, one of the shepherd moons. The bottom is nearly the same scene from the solar system simulator, about 7pm London time, Monday night.

A few suggestions for imaging ... according to the solar system simulator, Mimas will pass in front of Dione at 7 minutes past London midnight next Tuesday. Tethys hangs loose on the near side of Saturn's rings, seen nearly edge on. Below, Rhea and Titan make a fetching pair tomorrow around dinnertime on the American East Coast. Except for Titan, all of Saturn's moons are pretty much big ice globes in space. In other words, white. Iapetus, Hyperion, and Phoebe are somewhat sooty--we don't know from what exactly, but where these moons aren't white, they're pretty much black. Still, the view is impressive. Just in case NASA needs help pointing its imaging devices...

I love algebra, don't you? My third-grade daughter was showing me her homework the other night. Some problem like Jane drives 450 miles one weekend to visit her mother. Saturday she drives 50 miles more than on Sunday, and arrives for Sunday dinner. Poor Brittany. They haven't taught algebra yet. This problem would be a snap if she could reduce the problem to an equation: 450= (x+50) + x Combine the x's and you get: 450 = 2x + 50 Subtract fifty from each side and you get: 400 = 2x Divide each side by 2 and you get: x = 200 And because x is the number of miles on day two, Jane drove 250 miles on the first day. Aside from the fact that if I were in Jane's shoes, I'd put the pedal to the metal and get there in time for Saturday dinner, but I digress ... Somebody criticized my suggestion that on average, a priest should prepare about an hour for every minute of length of his Sunday homily, and it brought to mind a CS post from 18 Nov 2003: I've dusted my algebra off and put it to use for liturgical purposes: m = 48(H-2) +12 and its corollary:H = ((m-12)/48) +2 Amy Welborn has a great blog and she commented this morning on the length and content of a bishop's Confirmation homily. Last Spring, our local bishop, a seemingly nice guy and cancer survivor, came to preside at Confirmation. His office told us that if we had a mid-week liturgy, there would be no Eucharist. First time in my experience, but I understood if the bishop wanted to ration his energy for his health, it seemed a wise choice, if not a liturgically quirky one. Then he preached for about forty minutes. And I thought, "Heck. He could have trimmed 15-18 minutes off this homily and done Mass." As it was, the Confirmation Word Service was well over an hour long. This brings us to my Homily Formula, in which "m" is preparation time for a homily in minutes, and "H" equals the length of a homily in minutes. Instructions: If you want to know how long to prepare, simply plug in your expected homily length (H) in equation number one. Obviously, divide by 60 to get hours of prep time. If you want to know how long you can preach, use equation number two. Insert the number of minutes you have to prepare this week (m) and do the math. And they say that math and science education is wasted on us touchy-feely liturgist types. Ha! Here's a simple table for homily length: prep time in hours ------------------- homily length in minutes

-------- 0 -------------------------------------- 1.75 -------- 1 -------------------------------------- 3 -------- 2 -------------------------------------- 4.25 -------- 3 -------------------------------------- 5.5 -------- 4 -------------------------------------- 6.75 -------- 5 -------------------------------------- 8 -------- 6 -------------------------------------- 9.25 -------- 7 -------------------------------------- 10.5 -------- 8 -------------------------------------- 11.75 -------- 9 -------------------------------------- 13 ------- 10 -------------------------------------- 14.25 ------- 15 -------------------------------------- 20.5 I guess I'm giving preachers a break on Sundays, but if a guy has spent no time preparing a daily Mass homily, I give him 105 seconds, max, before it's time to pull the plug. I'm not too convinced that this is ill-spent time, or too much wasted effort. Nothing else a priest does affects as many people as his homilies. They should be meticulously prepared and backed up by voice training, Scripture study, continuing ed, and the substantial input of people who can give constructive feedback. If he's preaching for ten minutes on Sunday to hundreds of people if not a few thousand, consider the time spent per person in preparation. I still think he's getting off cheap. Keep working hard, Father, on those homilies. We're pulling for you, and we can back it up with fancy math.

John Allen's bishop friend in the synod raises a good point: “I wonder why in the hell they brought us here and put us through all this, to say absolutely nothing more than what has been painfully said for decades.” That's a good question. Personally, I think I'd enjoy the Italian food and scenery, not to mention the fraternal back-and-forth with my colleagues, but is this any way to run a Church? Of course, this was JP's idea, and who knows what he had in mind with it.

The thread on Cardinal Pell attracted a bit more notice than I thought it would, but the discussion on liturgical prayer and its leadership is a good one. The Liturgy of the Hours (probably worth a series itself) provides a classic case in point to defuse the notion that only clergy can preside over the Church's official liturgies. Turf-settling matters first: 1. Nobody denies the centrality of the Sunday Eucharist, nor the priest's role in leading the community that prays the Eucharist. 2. Nobody denies the place of the priest to oversee the Church's sacraments. 3. The Church offers formal liturgical rites outside the celebration of the sacraments or as auxiliary, preparatory, or subsequent expressions of those sacraments. These points are undeniable. But even so, they are not absolute values to themselves. If the connection between priest, Eucharist, and community were absolute, bishops would not begin new faith communities unless there was a priest to lead it. We know from the Church's long history of mission work (going back to the witness of the apostles) that the overriding concern of forming communities is the faith of the people expressing the movement of the Holy Spirit in their lives. In other words, God intends communities to form, whether a resident priest is available or not. Regarding the sacraments, the faith of the believer overrides the normative practice in time of need. Lay people and even non-Christians can validly baptize. Non-Catholics may receive the sacraments. It is not a neat picture, but circumstances bow to pastoral need as a matter of course. This is as it should be. Sacramental celebrations are not single magic moments conjured by clergy. The funeral and initiation rites contain various formalized ritual events to assist participants in deepening their faith in Christ, and the presidency of a priest is not always called for, nor is it always foreseen. The Church itself teaches there are many ways of prayer, both formal and informal, in which people are led to a more profound experience in the sacraments, especially the Mass. The Liturgy of the Hours is a classic example of formal, authorized liturgical prayer that does not require the leadership of a priest. Religious communities of women and some men lack clerical leadership. Yet their observance of Lauds, Vespers, and the other hours is no less authentic, valid, or powerful than if the bishop presides over these hours in a cathedral. "Public and common prayer by the people of God is rightly considered to be among the primary duties of the Church." (General Instruction of the Liturgy of the Hours, 1) Note that it's a duty, not a right or privilege. We are authorized to pray, just by being Christians. "Christ's priesthood is also shared by the whole Body of the Church, so that the baptized are consecrated as a spiritual temple and holy priesthood through the rebirth of baptism and the anointing by the Holy Spirit and are empowered to offer the worship of the New Covenant, a worship that derives not from our own powers but from Christ's merit and gift." (GILH, 7) The priesthood of baptism, but not a priesthood of power and privilege, but one rooted in Christ's grace. Hopefully, that should keep the swelled heads in place. "... there is a special excellence in the prayer of the community. Christ himself has said: "Where two or three are gathered together in my name, I am there in their midst" (GILH, 9) Christ's presence, but check this out: Christ's presence in prayer and song as well as in community and Word: "There Christ himself is present - in the gathered community, in the proclamation of God's word, 'in the prayer and song of the Church.'" (GILH 13) Somehow I think Cardinal Pell would have a hissy if he ever read the GILH. Sections 20-27 speak of the various communal celebrations of the Hours, and encourage bishops and clergy to observe, share, and lead lay people in this celebration. Section 24 has this to say about the special observance of religious, especially contemplatives: "Communities of canons, monks, nuns, and other religious who celebrate the liturgy of the hours by rule or according to their constitutions, whether with the general rite or a particular rite, in whole or in part, represent in a special way the Church at prayer. They are a fuller sign of the Church as it continuously praises God with one voice and they fulfill the duty of "working," above all by prayer, "to build up and increase the whole Mystical Body of Christ, and for the good of the local Churches." This is especially true of those living the contemplative life."

GILH 27 gives a nod to the laity praying the Office:

"Lay groups gathering for prayer, apostolic work, or any other reason are encouraged to fulfill the Church's duty, by celebrating part of the liturgy of the hours." For twenty years as a liturgist, I've attempted to dismantle the notion that the liturgy of the hours is the exclusive domain of clergy and religious. That said, religious women and men give a far better and more public witness to the virtue of praying the Hours than priests, especially parish priests. And most of those communities that do pray in common lack a member priest to lead. However one coins a term for prayer leader, it is an undeniable fact that lay people can and do lead many of the authentic liturgical rites of the Church. It seems clear that the sacraments are reserved for the leadership of the clergy. And while acknowledging the pride of place of the sacraments, especially the Eucharist, which "make" the Church in the sense of our vigor in the Spirit, it strikes me as unseemly that portions of Church life, while enjoying less of a crucial role, somehow deserve less honor merely for lacking an ordained leader. A model of Church that stresses cooperation, ability, Christ's presence, and most of all is attuned to the needs of the faithful, is a far more fitting (and more truthful) model than one in which everything must revolve around the clergy's presence and awareness. Lead on, lay people.

From time to time I think about updating the Blog with fancy colors or artwork or other fun stuff. Last week, I was reading an article about blogs somewhere that suggests the lean and simple approach is better. Any excuse not to spend money on the internet, I guess. Neil, what do you think? I updated the blogroll. As I find sites that link to CS, I post a link in kind. If any reader has linked CS, but I have yet to link you, just e-mail me and I'll get to it. I don't know if that's a standard net courtesy, but it seems logical to me. It's been there since the beginning, but I heartily recommend you "see the solar system" on the sidebar over there. You can view planets and moons from over forty vantage points in the solar system. You can also run the simulation forward or back in time about twenty years. Change the field of view, too. A field of view of 30 degrees will give you a sight as if your computer monitor was a window into space. "Play god with planets" is also great fun, especially when you get a feel for adjusting orbits, planet masses, and the like. I learned how to program the starting system to put some planets in orbit around each other. Not every link is in ideological alignment with CS, but I've been a frequent visitor to almost all of them. They're worth a visit, if the conversation around here gets boring.

I like Australia, but I think they could use a better cardinal, at least in Sydney. George Pell said at the synod (Zenit daily dispatch from 12 October), "There is no such thing as 'lay-led liturgy,' because lay people can only lead devotional prayers and para-liturgies." Apparently the cardinal has never heard of Liturgy of the Hours, or does he seem aware that catechists, religious, and lay people indeed lead many official celebrations of the Church's rites. I've never put much stock in that term "para-liturgy." Liturgy is liturgy. Devotions are devotions. Cardinals will be cardinals, I guess.

"By virtue we merely mean the avoidance of vices that do not attract us" When I hear complaints that Father ____ never preaches on ______ (fill in your favorite sin), I think of Lynd's comment.

... is the astronomical term for one celestial body covering up another body. When I was running Cassini's Dione flyby through the solar system simulator, I noticed that the moon Rhea passed behind Dione several hours before the flyby, about 0100 Universal Time on Tuesday, in fact. NASA will get some shots of this, I thought. And they did. Check it out. These items are in the Raw Images section. The first four here were taken about 60-80 seconds apart, I'd estimate. Number five down there about four or five minutes later. If you remember vinyl records or you are a rapper, I can communicate the set up visually to you. Imagine Saturn is the metal nub around which your lp spins. The paper glued to the center of the record that tells you the song list would be the rings. Now imagine some boor at your swingin' 70's party has eaten a chocolate chip cookie while checking out your hi-fi stereo system and has left some crumbs on the vinyl. Those crumbs are Saturn's moons and if you can imagine your crummy record moving much slower than 33rpm, you'll get a feel for the occasional occultation of a moon by another. Look at your record (I hope it wasn't Pink Floyd) edge on. Every so often, that chocolate chip on track 2 will hide that cookie particle sitting on track 4 on the other side. Keep doing this for awhile, and maybe your guests will think you're dealing with some pharmaceutical you ingested. Most of Saturn's moons and all of its rings are orbiting the planet along this invisible plane. (Don't ask me about Phoebe or Hyperion right now.) From any of these "regular moons," you'd get a nice show now and then: one moon passing in front of another. Cassini scientists decided to take advantage of these occurences and get some good shots for us earthlings. This brings me to one of my beefs about set design on SF movies: when they show a nice arrangement of three or four moons in the sky of some planet. Well. Yes, it can happen. But it doesn't happen all the time. Usually, those moons would be scattered across the sky. Some of them might have set hours ago. But when they do "collide" in the sky, it's a nice sight. Two happens pretty frequently, at least from the viewpoint of Cassini. As you can see, it doesn't last for too long. I'm waiting for some confluence of three moons. If I had a day to burn, I'd run the solar system simulator and see if anything was coming up. Meanwhile, if any celestial events happen by your way today, be sure to look up.

DarwinCatholic blogged last Friday about moving planets. We get the word, by the way, from the Greek "wanderer," those five bright "stars" that we unfixed and moved about in the heavens. Scientists now speculate that Neptune lived its youth closer to the sun, between Saturn and Uranus, possibly. Gravitational play among the early solar system's planets launched it out to its current resident address at 2.7 billion miles from the sun. How can this happen? You can see it demonstrated on this web site if you play around with the planet Masses and orbits. I've been able to get planets orange and purple to switch positions by manipulating the orbit size of the white planet. Many of the nearly two hundred planets discovered orbiting nearby stars are very large and very close to their home stars. Any earth-like planets would have been sadly ejected into interstellar space (or into the sun) as these big bullies made their way inward. For astronomers hoping for familiar earth-like planets, this does not bode well for their numbers in the galaxy. It might be that we were fortunate to have a Jupiter that settled 483 million miles out and stayed there. It might have chucked Neptune out a bit further, but at least it didn't consign us to a frozen existence billions of miles from our sun. Good stuff coming in from Saturn this past week. Check it out here. As of this writing, a close pass of Dione is just three hours away.

Go here for the full text of Bishop Lungu's address to the synod. First highlight: In number 42 it states that in liturgy, a person looks not at himself but God. The document therefore needs to emphasize more on the living God in his relationship with his people rather than the human activities encapsulated in liturgical traditions, norms and rubrics. In this way, we will avoid the temptation of either finding past solutions for today's pastoral challenges related to the Eucharist or focusing too much on the shadows as it has been reflected in the document. Now that's a thought that made me stand up and take notice. Too much focus on the rubrics could mean an overly horizontal approach to the liturgy; not God-centered enough. Well ... that rings true. Then an item on beauty: ... it would be useful to quote the then Cardinal Ratzinger who, addressing the movement known as Communion and Liberation in 2002 said: “Being struck and overcome by the beauty of Christ is more real, more profound knowledge than mere rational deduction. Of course we must not underrate the importance of theological reflection, of exact and precise theological thought; it remains absolutely necessary. But to move from here to disdain or reject the impact produced by the responses of the heart in the encounter with beauty as a true form of knowledge would impoverish us and dry up our faith and theology. Is theology an enemy of beauty? Potentially so, if we see theology as a natural and pervasive guarantor of the expression of faith. This is one of my favorite soapboxes, of course: that true artists must have an appropriate range of expression to offer music, art, and architecture that will lead us to the experience of the Divine. Could we ask our theologians to launch a pastoral reflection on the theology of beauty in order to shed more light on the shadows experienced in the celebration of the Eucharist? Yes. Participation of the laity, art. No. 44... The use of the phrase minimal assistance and collaboration in reference to the participation of the laity in the celebration of the Eucharist should either be modified or removed completely. O yes. In his article, the Eucharist: Source and Summit of the life of the Lay Faithful, Matteo Calisi states: “despite liturgical reform, there still lingers on a widespread clerical mentality in the liturgy, seeing the celebration of the mystery more the work of the clergy- the celebrant-than the 'work of the whole people of God' celebrating their Lord for it is often the case that the people do not unite themselves with the celebrant by active and lively participation, but aformal manner by only relating to the celebrant through the dialogue of ritual responses.” (Rediscovering the Eucharist: Pontificium Consilium Pro Laicis. Page 70). Go, Bishop Lungu, go. I find this part (art 62) of the document to be over-optimistic about the organ, Gregorian chant and even the use of Latin at international meetings in an attempt to meet the needs of the people of all time and places. My proposal is that we should not go back to making these instruments of worship universal. Our consideration of our cultural items should not be in comparison to, or in relation to either the organ, Gregorian chant or Latin, although they could still be treated as options for those who find them helpful. Communication and participation is vital in every liturgical celebration including the Eucharistic celebration. Our hope lies in the future and not in the past. We need courage to face our present pastoral challenges with regard to the Eucharist without nostalgic tendencies if the Eucharist is to respond to the pastoral needs of the time. Sensible, sensible commentary: respectful of the need to honor history and tradition, yet appropriately focused on the genuine aims of the Eucharist. As I see it, the challenge for traditionalists is to separate nostalgia from an appropriate respect for the past. For progressives, the challenge remains to focus on the worship of God, and the cultivation of holiness in the people. More bishops like this, please.

To which I might reply, "Because you didn't look for him."

This section of Apostolicam Actuositatem gives rather vague endorsements to large scale lay efforts on the national level and beyond. Promoting justice is an obligation, even a common good laced with "moral precepts." The hierarchy sees this as a preparation for the taking root of the Gospel.

Cooperation is lauded:

Catholics should try to cooperate with all men and women of good will to promote whatever is true, whatever just, whatever holy, whatever lovable (cf. Phil. 4:8). They should hold discussions with them, excel them in prudence and courtesy, and initiate research on social and public practices which should be improved in line with the spirit of the Gospel.

Clearly, the spirit of the 60's suggested to the council deliberators that withdrawal from the world was not a serious option, not in light of an acknowledgement that the world has yet to receive the Gospel. Not in light of the role of the lay person to find common ground, as it were, with those who would be willing to engage the Christian in the political sphere.

Various non-Christian movements and tendencies are fertile ground:

... the irresistibly increasing sense of the solidarity of all peoples is especially noteworthy. It is a function of the lay apostolate sedulously to promote this awareness and to transform it into a sincere and genuine love of brotherhood.

Fertile for the development of Christian ideals, that is. Special awareness for developing nations is called for, as are "practical" solutions outside the purview of theology, doctrine, etc..

Tolerance, or if you're more comfortable, mutual respect:

All who work in or give help to foreign nations must remember that relations among peoples should be a genuine fraternal exchange in which each party is at the same time a giver and a receiver. Travelers, whether their interest is international affairs, business, or leisure, should remember that they are itinerant heralds of Christ wherever they go and should act accordingly.

In other words, when away from home, mind your manners.

This section strikes me as a repudiation of a Catholic circle-the-wagons or head-for-the-hills mentality. The lay person is obliged (their words, not mine) to actively engage the world, not with the notion of being corrupted by it, but with the expressed purpose of preparing the way for the Gospel.

This is substantially different from the straw man complaint, "Vatican II has mistakenly been about adapting the Church to the world." Dialogue does not imply a tacet acceptance. AA14 clearly keeps the focus on two items: (1) Collaborate on what is congruent to the Gospel (2) Prepare for the time when the world is ready to accept the Gospel.

Vatican reporter John Allen reports the reported gay ban on seiminarians appears to be CWN puffery. Three considerations for SSA candidates are reported: 1. If candidates have not demonstrated a capacity to live celibate lives for at least three years; 2. If they are part of a "gay culture," for example, attending gay pride rallies (a point, the official said, which applies both to professors at seminaries as well as students); 3. If their homosexual orientation is sufficiently "strong, permanent and univocal" as to make an all-male environment a risk. This seems sensible, given that heterosexual candidates are probably also given the once-over on this. 1. Having engaged in sex the past three years, including looking and doing things with men's mags or women's lingerie catalogues or premium cable/satellite channels. 2. If they are part of the heterosexual culture: attending bachelor parties, strip clubs, porn theaters, military tailhooks, Bluto-style frat parties, etc. 3. There are a lot of risks in the seminary environment for a heterosexual man who is not sexually mature. There are also many more years of risks ahead for priests once ordained who serve the Church in very lonely situations. Celibacy was designed to be lived in a monastic setting. Seminary is not unlike a monastery. But big rectories with solo priests seem to be breeding grounds for trouble we don't need to skirt. When I was in graduate school, I had problems and stress in my life: academic performance, earning money for next semester (or borrowing it), doubts about my future, relationships, etc.. Life seems much heavier than those mostly idyllic days. Temptations seem much more grave these days than twenty years ago. If priests continue to act as isolated princes in their rectory-castles, who provides the monastic corrective when someone is indulging in too much drink, sex, food, gambling, or other unsafe practices?

Anita acquired the dvd of Monty Python and the Holy Grail last week. One scene erupts in my mind, as I read the varied conservative outcry about the Miers nomination. As difficult as it might be for peasants to fathom the weight of an accused witch, maybe it's tougher for pro-life conservatives to grok that the Republicans are no friends of life. Generally speaking, of course.

Rock is the man of the hour for your up-to-date synod stuff. So go there. He reports this gem from Father Mark Francis, Superior General of the Viatorians. That's as in not victorian. Read: If the synod is to have a positive effect on the Eucharistic life of the faithful, practical means for training and encouraging priests to better understand the Sacred Scriptures, to prepare homilies that truly proclaim the Good News, and to cultivate an effective celebratory style all need to be emphasized in seminary formation and in on-going programs of formation for priests and deacons. For example, how many of our seminaries devote time to the practical matter of preaching or to liturgical presiding? As a Superior General, in reviewing the seminary formation of my candidates for priesthood in the 14 countries where my community is at work, it is my impression that they are given little in the way of practical help in homiletics or liturgical presiding. Undoubtedly there are sociological arid other factors that militate against Mass attendance of the Christian faithful. But rather than simply blame our Catholic people's lack of faith and the secularization of society for the small percentage who attend Mass in many countries, we also need to acknowledge with sadness that bad preaching, and poorly prepared and poorly executed Eucharistic celebrations sometimes drive good people away from the Church. Why do I feel as if the sun has passed from behind a cloud? I am so sick and tired of hearing clergy whine about those pagan Catholics coopted by the culture reading the Sunday paper in bed after having sexual intercourse outside of marriage. More of Francis! Less of Scola! Do I show my true colors by saying the Synod is more fun than NFL Draft Day?

It's on the agenda, seemingly. Zenit touches on it. You can get a bit more from the Italian news agency ANSA: Monsignor Pierre Antoine Paulo, bishop of Haiti, said that "under certain conditions" the Catholic Church allowed communion to be taken by people who were technically in a state of sin. "We have to ask ourselves whether in particular cases, as already happens for certain sinners, it could not be given to remarried divorcees," he said. Sinners? Sinners are going to Communion? In our Church? Seriously, I wonder who he means, exactly. Msgr Paulo's remark was one of several made by bishops from countries far away from Rome which indicated a slightly different viewpoint from that held by central Church authorities. Is this Italian sarcasm? "Slightly" different? Cardinal Angelo Scola, who has the job of coordinating the synod, did not respond directly to the Haitian bishop's remark but noted in comments later that communion was a "gift" and not a "right". Scola also said once that the Church often does an inadequate job explaining itself. Example here? I think so. The Eucharist is a gift of Christ, not of the hierarchy. Priests certainly are responsible for the appropriate distribution of God's gift, but this issue is worthy of serious discussion and discernment. "Gift" for the laity also means "gift," not "right," for the clergy as well. Respect for the Sacrament of Marriage does not begin and end in the domicile. Bishops and parish priests must live up to their responsibility to oversee how marriages are fostered and encouraged. I'd include married persons in the parish as well. We do a grave disservice to conduct some weddings as favors to parents who still live in the parish. Splintering preparation for marriage between one's childhood parish and one's current parish is no boon for the engaged couple. Well ... if you got me started on that topic, it'd hijack if not swamp the whole post. Let me finish off my remarks by commenting on the critique that Americans have swamped the annulment market. A few things: The critique itself is silly. Americans respect the law and appropriate procedures. Except for about three or four countries, the rest of the Catholic world is far less churched than US Catholics. Italy, France, and the rest have fewer annulments, not because they respect Church teaching more, but because they observe it far less. Leave it to be said: Diverging viewpoints were also apparent in other areas of the synod's debate, which focuses on the Eucharist, or communion. It will be interesting to read more about these in the days ahead.

Zenit reported briefly on the question of ordaining married men to the priesthood. Cardinal Scola of Venice shot down the idea quickly, citing the tired old arguments. "The cardinal considered it superfluous to reiterate "the profound theological motives which have led the Latin Church to unite the conferring of ministerial priesthood to the charism of celibacy." ... and overlooking the fact that nobody has suggested celibacy should die out. And is the Latin Church really responsible for governing the charism of celibacy? I thought it was the Holy Spirit.

I noticed the Lectionary for Masses with Children is on the docket for the USCCB meeting next month. This passed under my radar; anybody know what's up with it, other than the provisional okay granted by the CDWDS in '92? While we're talking USCCB, let me again float the balloon that a hotel might not be the ideal setting for a meeting like this. That said, not many retreat houses or monasteries can provide for two-hundred bishops for four days.

A thoughtful post on Hallowed Ground got me to thinking. Many of my family members served in the military in previous generations. I have a step-niece and maybe some distant cousins serving today. I've known many military folks and their families. My liturgy committee chair is a retired air force officer, just the finest sort of man one could know dedicated to God, family, and Church. What I was reflecting upon was my own experience getting into Catholic high school. I confess a grave naivete as a youth, but I also found, like the author of Hallowed Ground, a disturbing sense that this was not how it should be. Unlike Mr Culbreath though, I didn't pack up and leave. One HG commenter suggested, "Beyond the obvious cultural rot, I would suggest that this is partially the function of having a "volunteer" (underclass) military." Heh. Death metal, lynch mobs, the Borgias: haven't we always had rot? And underclass people being blamed for crudity? Who finances pornography in the world? Fox network and movies? Do the Sopranos live in hovels? Conscription is really the answer for the depraved portions of the culture of the military? This was the beginning of my consideration of pacifism as the only reasonable expression I found for living the Christian faith in the world. Face it: people didn't invent a code of honor just because it added to the allure of soldiering. Military leaders saw it as a necessary balance for the cruel things a fighter must see and do to do the job. Today, all bets are off. The president condones torture when it aligns with military objectives. He summarily dismisses captured enemies as non-military non-combatants and believes a unilateral decision is within his power. People in power can't even take responsibility for wrongdoing under their command. Are neocons admitting that Rummy and his generals part of the moral underclass? I suppose it is possible for good Catholics to be military people today. If so, God bless them. I couldn't do it. The disintegration of ethics from the top down is seriously disturbing--or should be so. We always have a choice to refuse to cooperate with it. Maybe it's become a moral imperative.

The lay apostolate par excellence: the effort to infuse a Christian spirit into the mentality, customs, laws, and structures of the community in which one lives, is so much the duty and responsibility of the laity that it can never be performed properly by others.

The reason, most likely, that clergy do not belong in public office.

In this area the laity can exercise the apostolate of like toward like.

An awkward phrasing for peer ministry.

It is here that they complement the testimony of life with the testimony of the word. It is here where they work or practice their profession or study or reside or spend their leisure time or have their companionship that they are more capable of helping their brethren.

Like prayer, an apostolate is for "all times." How do lay people do it? Another list:

- especially by conforming their lives to their faith so that they become the light of the world

- by practicing honesty in all their dealings so that they attract all to the love of the true and the good and finally to the Church and to Christ

- by fraternal charity which presses them to share in the living conditions, labors, sorrows, and aspirations of their brethren with the result that the hearts of all about them are quietly prepared for the workings of saving grace

- a full consciousness of their role in building up society whereby they strive to perform their domestic, social, and professional duties with such Christian generosity that their manner of acting should gradually penetrate the whole world of life and labor

- reach(ing) out to all wherever they may be encountered

- not exclud(ing) any spiritual or temporal benefit which they have the ability to confer

- announc(ing) Christ to their neighbors by means of the spoken word as well.

No future of the Church, either, for "(c)hildren also have their own apostolic work to do. According to their ability they are true living witnesses of Christ among their companions."

The list, in brief: conformity to faith, honesty, charity, awareness of their role, constant outreach, generosity, direct proclamation of Christ. Most of us excel in one or two of these--that's not a danger, really. The trap for us lay people would be to put too much trust in any one avenue. For example: to rely on conformity to faith (perhaps interpreted as orthodoxy) at the expense of other aspects of the apostolate. If we're talking evangelization of non-believers, one is likely to attract like-thinkers. For example, if I were to aspire to be a fine evangelist, I think the mark of excellence would be how many people I have led to the Catholic faith who don't think like I do. Or as St Paul suggested, being all things to all people, so that some might be saved.

Thoughts?