Category Archives: WDTPRS

EXCERPT:

In our prayer today there is a theme of continuity. We even have a form of the word continuus. In the beginning of the Post communion Father refers to the constant helps we depend on from the actual graces God confers upon us. The effect of redemption will be eternal and unending. In the final line we hear of that eternal effect linking and yoking together our participation in the sacred sacramental mysteries we experience in Holy Mass, on the one hand, with the conduct and mores of our lives on the other. For the baptized Catholic Christian there must be continuity between our reception of the sacraments and the way we live. Read More →

A tip of the biretta is owed to frequent participant Henry    o{]:¬)   for the news that WDTPRS is quoted on the site of the Diocese of Knoxville, where His Excellency Bishop Joseph E. Kurtz is laboring in the Lord’s vineyard.  … Read More →

EXCERPT:
The vocabulary of our prayer today is very dense, and so our English translation will suffer if we try to come up with one-to-one equivalents for the Latin elements. For example, the word sensus has great weight. It means more than simply “sense”. Even in a non-theological source such as the preferred Latin Dictionary of fame we find that sensus carries meaning beyond what we might perceive by the five physical senses of the body or by the perceiving powers of the mind. It points to that which is common to all human beings, “common sense”. This not the “common sense” which we might have (or lack) in, for example, not standing too close with our back to the lions’ cage when posing for a photo. This is also not the Kantian a priori principle of every judgment of taste, the Kantian term for the so-called subjective principle which determines only by feeling rather than concepts, though nonetheless with universal validity, what is liked or disliked by all people. It is not quite the ancient Greek idea of koine aisthesis according to the Aristotle (De anima – II,6, 418a17-20) which applies to our capacities of perceiving objects through more than one sense. Aristotle suggests a “common sense” power by which we perceive things. Medieval Aristotelians suggest that sensus communis is the root and origin of all sensing. Thus we are able to hear the roar, feel the bite and then see the shaggy mane and realize that it is the one and the same lion gnawing us as he drags our leg into the cage … when we lack the other sort of common sense. So, we might say that this is the power of uniting mentally the impressions conveyed by the five physical senses which constitutes ordinary understanding, without which one is foolish or insane and thus prone to lack common sense.
Read More →

EXCERPT:
Holy Mass is both the Sacrifice of the Cross renewed, and the Supper, a meal foreshadowing the heavenly banquet to come. It is Calvary being renewed inseparably within the context of the renewal of the Last Supper Christ celebrated with His Apostles as His Passion began. Holy Mass is simultaneously both Supper and Sacrifice.

Perhaps in the last two decades and more, we have all experienced descriptions of Holy Mass which emphasize the meal dimension of the liturgical action to the point that the sacrificial dimension of Mass is so completely obscured that it is virtually obliterated. This eclipsing of the sacrificial aspect by the more warm and comforting meal facet results nearly always in a choice of a liturgical style that, to put it mildly, departs from the traditional Roman style. I think it is not unusual in the least to find in the meal point of view a greater measure of fellowship and celebration, commonality, and even informality (particularly in a culture becoming ever more informal). While the meal characteristic might be described as more “horizontal,” the sacrificial element is decidedly more “vertical.” The very thought of “sacrifice” might lead most people to be introspective rather than outgoing, quiet and reserved rather than boisterous, solemn rather than informal. Therefore, the style of service at the altar, the content of homilies, the choice of music, the quality of vestments and so forth, will be very much influenced by the gravitational pull exerted by one “force” in the Mass or the other, meal or sacrifice, horizontality or verticality, introspection or outward expressiveness.

Yet, the Holy Mass of Catholics must be allowed to reveal both dimensions, meal and sacrifice, in a dynamic unity. What I mean by dynamic here is that from day to day, week to week, season to season, Holy Mother Church may highlight one more than the other according to the time and feast. Also, within a Mass we might be more sensible of now one, now the other as being the primary focus of a prayer, an action, and even a silence and rest. All of us are challenged to maintain a balance of vision and perception during Mass. When the meal dimension is being brought to the fore, we must always strive to view the meal through the lens of sacrifice, and vice versa. This is particularly the challenge of the priest, sometimes banally described by some who emphasize the horizontal, as the “waiter” at the “meal.” He must be both “servant” in the sense of “ministry” (from Latin ministro which among various things means “to serve out or hand out food”) as well as the priest/victim, simultaneously offering sacrifice and being sacrificed on the altar, which is simultaneously a “table.” Read More →

EXCERPT: [Someone asked about “astare” in the 2nd Eucharistic Prayer and wanted a clarification for those who want to say that this means that people must stand during the Eucharistic Prayer.]

To your question about astare: I wrote about this in the series on the Eucharistic Prayers in June 2004. The Preface of the 4th Eucharistic Prayer uses similar vocabulary. I wrote in these WDTPRS pages last year but, Fr. RF, you made me dig a little more. Some might not immediately recognize asto as adsto, which the precious Lewis & Short Dictionary says means, “to stand at or near a person or thing, to stand by”. The L&S will also make clear that asto has the synonym adsisto. If you have ever heard the phrase “to assist (adsisto) at Holy Mass” this is the concept: you are present and actively participating. Also, during the Roman Canon the priest describes the people as circumstantes, literally “standing around”. This doesn’t mean ought to be physically standing around the altar with their hands in their pockets (though I must confess I have seen precisely that). Rather, they are morally and spiritually “around” the altar, participating each according to their vocation and capacity. In his supplement to L&S, A. Souter says that adsto is the equivalent of sum. A. Blaise, on the other hand, says liturgical adsto is “to be nearby; to serve”. The same goes for adsisto. I think anyone who would try to use this as a defense of standing during the consecration would be using a terribly superficial argument. Moreover, whatever the translation says, the Church’s clear liturgical law says that at that moment, unless they are impeded, everyone must be kneeling at the time of the consecration in most of the world’s dioceses. In the USA people must kneel from the end of the Sanctus, through the whole of the Eucharistic Prayer, to the end of the great “Amen” (GIRM 23). This adaptation was purposely sought by the bishops of the USA and it was approved by Rome. Are people kneeling? Read More →

In the 1962 Missale Romanum there are texts available for the feast "B. Mariae Virginis Divini Pastoris Matris" in the section toward the back of Masses for certain places. Here is the nice… COLLECT:Domine Iesu Christe, Pastor bone,qui pro ovibus … Read More →

EXCERPT:
I think it is important to emphasize that when the Vatican or most decent priests make distinctions about what lay people can or cannot do, say in the context of Mass or in the realm of moral theology, they are not simply being mean or oppressive. The principle at work is this. Lay people have a great dignity of their own. To uphold that dignity, sometimes it is necessary to say “no”, and it is not “clericalism” to say it. When the inherent dignity of lay people is underappreciated the mistake is often made of imposing on them a false dignity by “clericalizing” them. Much of the clericalization of lay people has come from a truly “clericalistic” attitude. It is a common error to think that priests (and religious) are the “real” members of the Church and therefore, in order to bring lay people up the ladder of dignity, they need to be made be act like ordained priests and do the things priests do. Some priests have shuffled off their own proper roles onto the shoulders good-hearted willing volunteers whom Father is seeking to actualize. This does untold damage to both lay people and priests alike, since by this process neither of them are able properly to attend to their true vocations. At the same time it must be recognized that many of the things that priests are being required to do today are often best handled by lay people. The extremes of Father doing everything and Father abandoning even his own roles must both be avoided. And if people make the mistake sometimes of thinking that priests, etc., are the real Church, similarly we must avoid the error of thinking that priests don’t belong to the Church. The Church is both lay and ordained, each complementing and building the other. Read More →

EXCERPT:
All of the above notwithstanding, let Powers That Be today pay close attention to what Joseph Ratzinger (now gloriously reigning as the sovereign Pontiff) wrote in God Is Near Us: The Eucharist, The Heart of Life (Ignatius Press, 2003) on a related topic, the “pro multis” issue: “The fact that in Hebrew the expression ‘many’ would mean the same thing as ‘all’ is not relevant to the question under consideration inasmuch as it is a question of translating, not a Hebrew text here, but a Latin text (from the Roman Liturgy), which is directly related to a Greek text (the New Testament). The institution narratives in the New Testament are by no means simply a translation (still less, a mistaken translation) of Isaiah; rather, they constitute an independent source” (emphasis added – cf. pp. 37-8, n. 10). Read More →

EXCERPT:
Let me ask you. What would the last thirty some years have been like if we had had better translations all along? What would our Church be like today had the mandate of the Council to maintain Latin been obeyed? Would we have a different sense of our identity as Catholics? Would those things have helped us better influence the society we live in? Would we be better prepared to handle the pressures of daily life? Would so many people, including clergy, have been acquiescent in the face of popular cultural trends and the destruction of our education system? I think much of what we see going on today could have been averted. We can’t know anything for sure, but I have little doubt that things would have been very different indeed. This is because I believe that the true Actor at Mass is Christ Jesus the High Priest. Mass is effective and nourishing. Had things been in better shape, Catholics would be different today. Lex orandi, lex credendi! The way we pray has a reciprocal relationship with what we believe. Read More →

EXCERPT:
One of the driving principles of Liturgiam authenticam (LA) is a proper understanding of inculturation. LA is the fifth instruction on how the liturgical mandates of the Council were to be implemented. The fourth instruction Varietates legitimae concerned precisely inculturation. Inculturation must be properly understood. There is a dynamic interchange and influencing process going on constantly between the “world” and the Church. Every different people of the globe has something of value to contribute to the Church at the same time that the Church, at least historically, forms and shapes whole peoples. This dynamic interchange means that the Church influences the world and the world in turn influences the Church. The Church gains many gifts from the world: music, art, architecture, languages and their literature, etc. These are taken in by the Church and made her own. However, and this is the key, everything the Church gives in this exchange must always be logically prior. This commercium goes on back and forth simultaneously with respect to the passage of time, but the Church… as the Church… gives and shapes first and then receives back what the world has done with her formation. That is to say, this is what happened when the Church carried out her role rightly. Read More →