The grumpy saint

It has been stated of quite a few saints that they were, how shall I put it delicately?.......less than warm hearted?........not one of nature's chucklers?.....downright bad tempered?

Father Vincent McNabb OP
 8th July 1868 - 17th June 1943
RIP 

Father Vincent McNabb OP., whose anniversary it is today, was one such man (his cause for canonisation is a work in progress as they say). I hasten to add that I never met this great man, he died long(ish) before I was born, but I had a great Dominican Friar friend (Fr Donald Proudman OP) who regaled me with stories of Fr McNabb and his notoriety, certainly within the community, of being a shade grumpy - a grouch is how they might put it in the USA.

But grumpiness, in this instance, was part of his spirituality. Fr McNabb had his mind set on God; not just for a few hours each day in front of a crucifix or the Blessed Sacrament, but a full on 16 or 17 hours of his being awake was dedicated to deep meditation on the Almighty. If a fellow monk passed him in the cloisters, Fr McNabb would respond testily to any greeting or approach of any kind. I wonder what form that took? I doubt it would have been along the lines of "Push off four eyes and leave me alone!" More like a grunt of disapproval at being interrupted; a harumph or growl like noise designed to keep further conversation at bay. After all, it was interrupting a conversation with God Almighty; who would not issue a harumph or two if faced with an inane "Morning Father" from some young novice when you were deep in a debate with the Lord.

Monsignor Ronald Knox once said of Fr McNabb:

 "Father Vincent is the only person I have ever known about whom I have felt, and said more than once, 'He gives you some idea of what a saint must be like.' There was a kind of light about his presence which didn't seem to be quite of this world."

This extract from Catholic Authors...

"Father McNabb was born in 1868 in Portaferry, County Down, Ireland, within a few miles of the rock that covers the bones of St. Patrick. "My father," wrote Father McNabb, "was a master 'Mariner' (to give him his noble title) and my mother, a dressmaker." Vincent, who was proud he was the seventh son and the tenth of eleven children, spent his schooldays at the diocesan seminary of St. Malachy's College, Belfast. When asked by the editor of The Catholic Times to lend assistance to Ireland during one of the last crises, Father McNabb wrote in his scalpel-like way that both peoples alike, the people of England and the people of Ireland have been martyred by the same imperious few. He said that he loved Ireland like a mother and England like a wife".

His great friend, GK Chesterton wrote of him: 'Nobody who ever met or saw or heard Father McNabb has ever forgotten him." That statement was certainly true of his period as an orator at Hyde Park's Speakers Corner on a Sunday afternoon. Those were the days of emerging communism in Great Britain and Fr Vincent was adept at cutting down to size any red who had the temerity to heckle from the safety of the crowd.

In 1913 he embarked on a successful lecture tour of the States and just four years later he was rewarded by the Master of Divine Theology degree. He taught, from 1929 to 1934 at the London University Extension where his subject was the Summa of St Thomas.
He wrote over thirty books including 'Where believers may doubt', 'The decrees of the Vatican Council' and 'Eleven Thank God!' an account of  his Catholic  mother and upbringing.

Fr McNabb held somewhat unorthodox beliefs regarding the social and economic structre, he abhorred technology and yearned for a countryside that could produce food and clothing with a high level of employment and a quality of life for all - not a bad philosophy at all and well summed up by this comment from him:-

 

"Buy boots you can walk in. Walk in them. Even if you lessen the income of the General Omnibus Company, or your family doctor; you will discover the human foot. On discovering it, your joy will be as great as if you had invented it. But this joy is the greatest, because no human invention even of Mr. Ford or Mr. Marconi is within a mile of a foot." 

Faced with an oncoming death he said:

 "I don't see why I should make a tragedy of this; ­ it's what I have been preparing for all my life. I am in the hands of my doctors, ­ or better, in the hands of my God."

 

  Eternal rest grant unto him, O Lord, and

  let perpetual light shine upon him.

  May he rest in peace. Amen

This prayer is one of many composed by the great man.....

Lord Jesus Save Me

"Lord Jesus, the one whom Thou lovest is sick" (Jn 11:3).

The one whom Thou lovest is strayed.
I have lost Thee.
I cannot find Thee.
Find me.
Seek me.
I cannot find Thee.
I have lost my way.
Thou art the Way.
Find me, or I am utterly lost.
Thou lovest me.
I do not know if I love Thee;
but I know Thou lovest me.
I do not plead my love, but Thine.
I do not plead my strength, but Thine.
I do not plead my deed, but Thine.
The one whom Thou lovest is sick.
I dare not say:
The one who loves Thee is sick.
My sickness is that I do not love Thee.
That is the source of my sickness which is approaching death.
I am sinking.
Raise me.
Come to me upon the waters.
Lord Jesus, "the one whom Thou lovest is sick."

Henry was here!

Yes, the ruined walls, ransacked sanctuary, vanished cloisters all tell a tale of a king obsessed with greed and lust; King Henry VIII to be precise, one time appointed 'Defender of the Faith' by the Pope; he soon became the opposite, the Persecutor of the Faith.

What would Britain be like today if Henry had not turned bad?

It is possible that we would be much like France, Spain or Italy who all suffered revolutions at various times but nothing on the scale that Henry, Edward and Elizabeth let loose on England and Wales. But, as with those countries,  all of our churches would still be Catholic, untouched by prudish protestant whitewash, glorious in furnishings and chalices and plate, intact and complete, full of statues and church art. Henry has a lot to answer for.

The ruins above are all that remains of an Augustinian Priory, founded in the 13th Century on the banks of the River Cleddau in Pembrokeshire's County Town of Haverfordwest. At one time monks would have tended to the sick and the leprous here, taught those that wanted a schooling, given employment to the poor, housed the aged and homeless (and less than  300 yards distant was a Dominican Priory offering more of the same).

The ruins have been capped in cement to prevent further decay taking place but it is not likely that any money to restore the Priory will ever be forthcoming from CADW, the heritage organisation charged with maintaining architectural integrity in Wales.

 After Henry's pillagers had made free with the holy place in 1536, local farmers and ne'er do wells would have moved in to remove much of the dressed stone and use it to build dwellings and pig sties and the like. The monks (those that were not executed for their faith) would have been turned out into a barren and heartless countryside and left to fend for themselves until such time as the elements so weakened their health that they succumbed to pneumonia and pleurisy.

The gentle cadences of plainchant were heard no longer, no rosaries were ever recited here again. What survives is the only medieval garden in Great Britain, complete with raised beds (as opposed to razed beds). But, in truth, there is not much to be seen.

That Time Of Year Thou Mayst In Me Behold

William Shakespeare

That time of year thou mayst in me behold
When yellow leaves, or none, or few, do hang
Upon those boughs which shake against the cold,
Bare ruined choirs, where late the sweet birds sang.
In me thou see'st the twilight of such day
As after sunset fadeth in the west;
Which by and by black night doth take away,
Death's second self, that seals up all in rest.
In me thou see'st the glowing of such fire,
That on the ashes of his youth doth lie,
As the deathbed whereon it must expire,
Consumed with that which it was nourished by.
This thou perceiv'st, which makes thy love more strong,
To love that well which thou must leave ere long.

                                                    Bare ruined choirs....



Want to be a modern martyr and not be killed?

Here's how.....

...The Conference of English and Welsh Bishops has approved one's right to kneel to receive Holy Communion. Yes, that is correct. I have re-read Fr Tim's blog and there it is in black and white....here's what the Bishops state:-


"...... individual members of the faithful may choose to receive Communion while kneeling".

I know that, Fr T advises against blogging in letters large and clear in a more recent post but.....I just cannot resist!
This is your chance to become a martyr for Christ; no communion rails? just kneel - Extraordinary Ministers? just kneel - unsympathetic parish priest? just kneel - parish scandalmongers? ignore 'em and just kneel!
We are all bound to obey our Bishops in matters of legitimate teaching regarding the Faith so please.... let's get on and do it!

If Padre Pio could do it.........?

This is what can happen if you bow before reception...

"...when they communicate standing, it is recommended that the faithful bow in reverence before receiving the sacrament."

(Bishops Conference of England & Wales)

Priests beware.......

CARDINAL ARINZE SPELLS IT OUT FOR THE BISHOPS

"The Church of Rome never said remove the altar rails..."

Bishops get it wrong....again!

Fr Tim and Fr Simon and Laurence England all carry news regarding the latest initiative (if that's the right word) from the Bishops of England and Wales. They, apparently, have made application (and received approval) to the Congregation for Divine Worship to have reception of Holy Communion standing as the general rule.

This is how the instruction reads:-


"In the Dioceses of England and Wales Holy Communion is to be received standing, though individual members of the faithful may choose to receive Communion while kneeling. However, when they communicate standing, it is recommended that the faithful bow in reverence before receiving the sacrament"

Erm....is there a message in this picture?

I know of a church that has had its altar rails removed in the past four weeks and, several others where the rails are stuck in limbo in a dusty church hall awaiting the ravages of time or, who knows, the call of the faithful who have had enough tomfoolery (good word that!) and who will no longer stand to be treated like cretins.

Just what do they have against kneeling for Heaven's sake? If Our Blessed Lord could so humble Himself to be abused and then crucified like a common criminal, can we not kneel to receive Him?

Do their Lordships not read or pay attention to the scriptures?


2:6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:

2:7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:

2:8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.

2:9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:

2:10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

2:11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

2:12 Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

2:14 Do all things without murmurings and disputings:

2:15 That ye may be blameless and harmless, the sons of God, without rebuke, in the midst of a crooked and perverse nation, among whom ye shine as lights in the world;

Phillippians Chapter 2.



The Chartres Pilgrimage......one day, maybe

I have long wished to go on the Chartres Pilgrimage (which is about to draw to a close for this year) but, always, something has got in the way. It may now never happen as 72 miles in 3 days seems an impossible target (I know there are lifts available but that seems to negate the object of the exercise).

Paris to Chartres - the mainstream route!

But I wish all pilgrims well in their magnificent task and hope and pray that, possibly this might be the last year of the double pilgrimage; I mean, of course, the SSPX Pilgrimage that runs from Chartres to Paris, culminating at Sacre Coeur Church, Montmartre. With the talks between Rome and Econe coming to a close, I hope (and I mean hope) that a concord has been struck and that, maybe, in 2012 both groups will march together (but in which direction?).

Chartres to Paris - the SSPX route!

I recall a comical tale regarding the SSPX pilgrimage of 10 plus years ago. The church authorities would not allow an SSPX Mass to be held in Sacre Coeur so, each year, the pilgrims hold it on the mount outside the church. It was the custom for a few pilgrims to take flags up the church tower and, at the moment of consecration, they would be waved, majestically from on high.
This would not do decided the church officals and so, all those progressing up the tower were subjected to close scrutiny. But they did not reckon on the resourcefulness of the SSPX who wrapped flags around the bodies of several of their Japanese pilgrims and sent them up the tower, loaded with cameras and looking for all the world like the stereotypical tourist.
At the concescration the flags flew over Montmartre once more, to the great annoyance of officialdom!

The New Translation is welcome but will it change things?

It might. It just might, especially where there is a celebrant who has the gravitas to say the Mass with reverence and invoke respect for the Body and Blood of Christ.

But, in the majority of cases we are still facing an intransigent laity who refuse to listen to the messages emanating from Rome; who are so bound up in their own secular pleasures of guitar music, happy clappy singing, hand holding and kiss of peace embracing that the sensitivities of language, reverence and content will pass them by.



Photo: Rorate Coeli
Sorry, but I have nothing in common with these people!

 They will be aided and abetted, of course, by Father Smirk and his wonderful way of starting the Mass by turning his back on the Almighty in order to grin inanely and say: "Good morning everybody."

That is why, regretfully, I shall not be beating a path to the Ordinary Form of Mass. I do believe that, over the past 50 years or so, some people (priests and laity) have lost sight of what the Mass is about. There is a belief that now the Mass is about "ME"........and what "I" can get out of it. A jolly good sing song. A bit of "look at me, I'm on the sanctuary" or, worse, "I'm a special minister" (Ministerium Extraordinarium more like). A feeling that the worship of God and the re-enactment of the sacrifice on Calvary have been overlooked in the rush to 'modernise' and tailor the liturgy to suit one's own ego.
The great Archbishop Sheen, when speaking of how young people described attending Mass as "not getting anything out of it" used to say to them: "But you're not bringing anything to the Mass!" And that is true today. Congregations have forgotten to 'bring' anything with them. They have forgotten that they are there to witness a sacrifice, not a celebratory meal; they have forgotten that the Mass should be a complete and unchanging means of bearing testimony to Christ and His teachings; an opportunity for us to have a more intimate dialogue with the Holy Trinity so that we may confide our fears and make our requests in more august surroundings than the living room or kitchen. And they have forgotten that they are there to worship, love and revere God, and you cannot do that effectively by singing "I wish I was a wiggly worm" or dancing around the sanctuary in flowing robes.

So it is not the New Translation that I have issue with. It is the fact that human pride will continue to reveal itself by those who refuse to kneel to receive the Body of Christ, those who distort the liturgy and those who chatter both before and after Mass. I have nothing in common with them; I am a Catholic!

Another extraordinary link back to the time of Christ

We have the Latin, we have the evolved liturgy and sentiment but, we also have the vestments! Not the flowing, nylon, Gothic type but the original Roman "fiddleback" Chasuble and all the accessories that go with it. These connect us back to the days of the early church, drawing us closer to Christ and the times he lived in.

Photo: Luzar Vestments
The chasuble or 'little house'

The meaning of vestments -

"Nevertheless, the sacred vestments translate the profound intuition of faith that the man who is a priest should vanish in the Person of the Everlasting Priest whose living Sacrament he is. The vesture he wears at the altar symbolises his reclothing with Christ who acts through his ministry".

Father Gerard Ellard SJ., writing in the early fifties, tells us that the vestments are derived from the everyday dress of Roman citizens. He explains the origin of the seven vestments as follows:-

"The ministers at the Sacrifice wear garments such as we now see nowhere else. These are modifications of the ordinary civil dress of the late Empire, say, of the 4th Century. Some of the priestly vestments are garments properly so-called, others are insignia of office.

Amice. In the order in which the vestments are put on, the first is a white, rectangular linen cloth put upon the shoulders and wrapped about the neck. This vestment is called an amice (amicta). It is a survival of the customary neckerchief or scarf of the ancients; by the older authors it is often called 'the protection of the voice'. Originally meant to serve purely practical purposes, to cover the neck and to protect the other vestments from the hair, the Amice becomes a very conspicuous item in the Middle Ages, when it was decorated with a wide, rich band of embroidery and allowed to show outside the other garments. Up to a certain point in the Mass it was even worn over the head, a usage that survives still in some monastic orders.
With the disappearance of this rich ornamentation, the amice went back to its original, humbler form.

Alb. In the whole of the Roman Empire of the 4th Century the customary body-garment of both sexes and all classes was a sleeved tunic reaching well below the knees and caught at the waist by a girdle. It was of white linen. Later, a short tunic became commoner in civil life, but churchmen kept to the longer form in their official functions. This old tunic lives on in our alb (Latin for white). .............The use of lace on the alb is a modern departure from tradition, and destined, it would seem, to disappear before long.

Tunic and Dalmatic. The decorated outer vestment worn by the subdeacon, called a tunic as well as the vesture of the deacon, called a dalmatic, are, in origin, outer tunics, with shorter, wider sleeves, and shorter body. The dalmatic is so called because this style of highly ornamented tunic came from Dalmatia (Croatia region).

Maniple. The maniple, a band of coloured, decorated fabric laid across the left forearm, is a relic of a handkerchief carried as an emblem of office by Roman officials. The consul carried such a ceremonial handkerchief and with it gave the signal for the opening of games and other functions. In the first detailed description of a Roman Mass we have, the Pope's handkerchief is used to give the signal to begin Mass. The maniple was formerly made of linen, and by reason of its humble origin was called a sudarium, a sweat cloth, or, because carried in the hand, a manual. Until about the year 1000 this clerical emblem of office was carried in the hand (usually the left); then began the custom of wearing it on the wrist or forearm. When that happened, its original purpose was lost sight of, and instead of white linen it was made of a coloured and ornamented fabric.

Stole. Quite a different mark of the clerical order is what is now called a stole ( a Greek word for garment in general). This was in  ancient times called the orarium (literally, mouth-cloth). How it was that a long, flowing band, slung over one or both shoulders and hanging loosely about the body, and originally destined for such humble purposes, should have become a highly prized symbol of the clerical order remains in the present state of our knowledge, an unanswerable question. Old mosaics and pictures show the stole worn in many different ways, even as it is now worn in distinctive ways by bishop, priest and deacon respectively.

The Chasuble. The most conspicuous of the sacrificial garments is the chasuble, as we say from the latin casula, a little house; so called, said St Isidore of Seville, because it covered the whole man. It is a modified form of the ancient paenula, a cone-shaped outer garment reaching down, more or less, the full length of the body all around, and provided with an opening and hood for the head. Designed for protection against all weathers in travelling, it finally became the ordinary outer garment for all wear, even replacing the toga of the high officials. At Rome it continued to be the ordinary outer garment for both sexes and all classes until the end of the 6th Century or later.

Thus, everyone in  a Roman church then wore a chasuble. St Augustine speaks of it as the clothing of even the poor, but, of course, it could be something very fine, and only a generation or so later St Fulgentius will not have a coloured chasuble because he thought that something for wealthy people. But Fulgentius was a monk and wore his monk's robe at the altar.
In the new European nations the chasuble was at first the ordinary garment of clerical attire for church, street and domestic uses. In the course of time it became reserved for priests and, later still, for priests only at the time of Mass.

The ordinary chasuble of today represents a very truncated form of the ample 'little house' of former ages. The garment, to allow freedom to the hands, had to be caught up over the forearms. Even in classical antiquity the chasuble was often cut somewhat shorter at the sides to facilitate freer movement. As long as pliable silk, the prescribed material for this vestment, continued to be used in making it, there was no great need for radical altering, but it was another thing entirely when stiff, brocaded velvets, themselves heavily embroidered, began to be substituted for silk. Then it was necessary to trim and cut away all that should have been folded. The nadir of the trimming process was reached in the 18th Century. Since that day a gradual reversion to the traditional garment has been making itself felt. This movement will probably be slow in progressing, because it depends in the last instance upon the slow-growing, inner religious sentiment, to which all change in external features of worship corresponds."

There's got to have been a terrible mistake.....

.......It's happened again, the unthinkable! My name has not appeared on the Queen's Birthday Honours list, not even a measly MBE! Chizzle! Not that I particularly yearn for the lollipop man's award.

My only consolation is that, having scanned the small print of the names of those who have been honoured, the names Ivereigh, De Valero, Stannard, O'Donnell, Longley and Curry are also missing. Phew!

Prayer for relief from stammering

A little known saint of Holy Mother Church is the Swiss Benedictine monk, St Notker Balbulus. He is the accredited patron saint of all who stammer and stutter and, I guess, those who suffer from any speech defect whatsoever.

The film, The King's Speech has highlighted the plight of those locked into this awful condition (it appears to affect many infants as well as adults).

St Notker, pray for those who stammer

"Notker the Stammerer" as he is known, stammered all of his life but those who suffer from this condition or, who have a loved one with it, may take recourse in this novena prayer.

Petition prayer to St Notker Balbalus - for those afflicted with stammering and stuttering

Dear Lord through the intercession of your beloved follower, St Notker Balbulus we ask for your help in untying the knots that entwine the thoughts, minds and tongues of those afflicted with stammering and uncertainty of speech.

Just as you took mud and spittle to unlock the eyes of the blind so, also, please help …………………in his/her sufferings and bring them to speak freely and unhaltingly  so that they may praise you all their days.

We praise Thee O Christ and adore Thee because by Thy Holy Cross Thou hast redeemed the world.

Bishops - is it right to criticise?

There is a current a debate over whether we should remain passive followers of the princes of the Church or whether we have authority to utter criticisms where deemed necessary.

St Paul - publicly admonished St Peter

Surprisingly, some 25 years ago the debate was  being aired perhaps for the first time in many centuries and the following is an extract from an article in Catholic Order by a John J Mulloy.

Bishops: Private Admonition and Public Rebuke:

"Several factors must be taken into account when considering this issue. Ordinarily, public rebuke is not to be engaged until private admonition has failed. But the experience of ever so many parents and orthodox Catholics shows that, where many Bishops are concerned, private admonition has no affect whatever. In fact, it is difficult even to get to see a Bishop when he knows that people are going to remonstrate with him concerning the way he is administering his episcopal office.

Most Bishops are mass media conscious and that means that they think in terms of avoiding adverse publicity; hence, only abuses which get into the media have the note of reality for them. As a consequence, these Bishops cannot be reached by by private admonitions, but only by some adverse criticism in the newspapers or on television.
As a general rule, without public criticism, most Bishops are unreachable.

The second question is whether, granting the fact that Bishops will not respond to private admonition, it is permissible to rebuke them publicly or not. In other words, is the layman's only recourse to suffer in silence and let widespread abuses against the teaching of the Catholic faith and morality go without any public notice being taken of it? Or does the pastoral responsibility attaching to the office of the Bishop demand that others call attention to his neglect of his crucial duties, when he ignores them or pretends that he has no such obligations?

In the period prior to Vatican II, the attitude of the ordinary Catholic lay person (in the United States) was to assume that public criticism or rebuke of a Bishop was never justified. But this was a period when Bishops generally were staunch upholders of Catholic faith and morality., and were strongly committed to the defence of Papal authority. These facts naturally created a certain attitude towards Bishops which arose out of the particular conditions of the era.
The perios since Vatican II, however, has seen such a radical change in the attitude of Bishops toward the protection of Catholic doctrine and towards the administration of their diocese that re-examination of this previous assumption is now in order......"

Interesting that the same issues that applied 25 years or more ago are just as relevant today.
Many Catholics still believe that the Bishop's writ should be allowed to run free; are such Catholics drawn from across the spectrum of liberal, moderate and traditionalist? I think not.

Where then does the authority of a layman to rebuke his Bishops derive from? We have, of course, the public reproof of St Paul to none other than St Peter at Antioch. St Thomas Aquinas states:

"It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly. Hence, Paul, who was Peter's subject, rebuked him in public, on account of the imminent danger of scandal concerning faith, and, as the gloss of Augustine says on Galatians 2:11: 'Peter gave an example to superiors, that if at any time they should happen to stray from the straight path they should not disdain to be reproved by their subjects' "

That seems quite clear - rebukes, reproofs and all valid criticisms are legitimate and even to be encouraged.

However, they should be delivered with the fullness of Christ's charity, fairly and unequivocally. That does not mean that one has to pull any punches, far from it, just be firm but fair.