Pray, Hope and Don't Worry

It makes me happy to suffer for you, as I am suffering now, and in my own body to do what I can to make up all that has still to be undergone by Christ for the sake of his body, the Church. [1]

The tomb of Padre Pio

Today is the feast day of one of my favourite saints; Saint Pius of of Pietrelcina, known to the Catholic world as Padre Pio. My father has a strong devotion to this enigmatic friar from Italy and spent a lot of time in the years preceding his canonisation spreading his message around the country. From an early age, I remember attending Padre Pio Days which included talks on his life and ministry together with slide shows, film reels, book stalls and piety stalls. I was amazed (and rather terrified) by the stories of his battles with devil and marvelled at his ability to bilocate, prophecy and discern the true state of a person's soul (For those who don't know much about him, I've included a short biography at the end of this post). Padre Pio's life was marked by extreme physical suffering, mental anguish and spiritual assault yet he was able to inspire others to live holy and fruitful lives: 

Joy, with peace, is the sister of charity. Serve the Lord with laughter.

This year, towards the end of May, I managed to fulfil a life long ambition and make a pilgrimage to San Giovanni Rotundo with two friends. Here, I use pilgrimage in the loosest sense of the word; we flew to the closest airport and stayed at a four star hotel literally a stone's throw from the shrine but I believe we all received immense spiritual benefits from the experience despite cheating.

San Giovanni Rotundo is located in Apulia region of Southern Italy. It's set on a plateau at the foot of a small mountain range in the Parco Nazionale del Gargano. As we had limited time, we decided to hire a car and drive from the airport so we were able to appreciate the geographical characteristics of the region. Driving in Italy is a thoroughly nerve wrecking experience especially when one's SatNav decides take routes through the narrowest streets in town or over a ten kilometre stretch of road which hasn't been built yet. I am quite sure that Padre Pio was largely responsible for returning the car to the hire firm in the same state in which it was leased to us. As taxing as driving was, the car did afford us one of the highlights of the trip - we were able to visit Monte Sant'Angelo and the shrine of Saint Michael. In doing so, we had a better understanding of why Padre Pio had such a strong devotion to the Prince of the Heavenly Hosts.

Mass at Saint Michael's Cave

Apart from Gargano, the land was only a little above sea level and most of it was given over to the cultivation of olives, fruit and grains. Though nearby Foggia is a large city, the rest of the countryside appeared to be sparsely populated with isolated farm houses and the odd coastal town. It was great to get a feel for the landscape in which Padre Pio would have undertaken his ministry. Though a lack of time meant that we weren't able to explore San Giovanni as much as we would have liked, it owes most of it's modern character to Padre Pio and the pilgrims he attracts. May appears to be a very quiet period for the shrine and the town itself felt a little empty.

View from Monte Sant'Angelo to the sea

Due to the nature of its expansion over the years, the Padre Pio shrine complex is set on several levels (though we only discovered this on the penultimate day). The new Padre Pio Pilgrimage Church is a massive structure with an upper and lower church, a blessed sacrament chapel, a museum, shops and a huge piazza. Designed by Renzo Piano and completed in 2004, it can accommodate 6500 pilgrims in the upper church and 30,000 outside. To my eye, the upper Church is a monstrosity; it looks like the set off one of the alien films and I didn't find it at all conducive to prayer. Thankfully, the lower church which houses the crypt and the tomb of St Padre Pio is far more intimate and I spent many hours there either in prayer and discernment. The walls of the passage way to the lower church and the interior of the church itself are decorated with mosaics designed by Fr. Marko I. Rupnik. Though the style of the mosaics is not to my taste, the theology behind them (gratefully explained to us by a friend who joined us from Rome) is both profound and awe inspiring. They tell the story of Padre Pio with collieries to the life of Saint Francis and depict scenes from the Bible.

Alien?

Mosaic of Padre Pio and St Michael

The Holy Family

The piazza

The lower church

The second church on the site is Santa Maria della Grazie and it was built in Padre Pio's lifetime, again in response to the number of pilgrims visiting San Giovanni. Unfortunately, as it was built in the 1960s, it had little to please my more classical tastes. It does however posses a striking mosaic of Saint Pope John Paul II, a beautiful statue of Our Lady and the Child Jesus and houses the confessionals made available to pilgrims during their time there. Going to confession under the patronage of Padre Pio was a deeply significant spiritual experience which strengthened my commitment to a sacrament which has been a great source of solace to me in recent years.

Santa Maria della Grazie

Unfortunately, I only discovered my favourite church in the shrine complex on the last day. Originally dedicated to Santa Maria degli Angeli in 1529, it is the original church attached to the monastery in which Padre Pio would have heard confession (the confessional he used is on display there). It was small, intimate and very prayerful and proved to be the perfect spot to reflect on the the life, sufferings and message of Saint Padre Pio. 

Santa Maria degli Angeli

I am truly grateful for my quasi-pilgrimage to San Giovanni Rotundo and I definitely intend to go back, hopefully for a longer period of time and perhaps in a more penitential manner. In the Year of Mercy, there could be few better patrons than Padre Pio; Pray, Hope and Don't Worry!

Biography

Born in Pietrelcina, Italy on May 25th 1887 to a deeply religious family, and given the name Francesco, Pio was thrust into spiritual battle from an early age. He regularly suffered physical and spiritual attacks from the devil but was able to find solace conversing with Jesus, Mary and his guardian angel. In 1903, at the age of 15 and with the blessing of his parents, he took the Habit of the Order of Friars Minor Capuchin and selected the name of Pio in honour the patron saint of Pietrelcina, Saint Pius V.

In response to Pope Benedict XV's call for prayer to end World War I in 1918, Padre Pio offered himself as a sacrifice for peace. In August and September of that year, he received several visions of the crucified Christ from which he received the physical stigmata. For the next 50 years he would exercise his priestly ministry in San Giovanni Rotundo, becoming renown for his devotion to Mass, confession, guardian angels and the rosary, for his fortitude in the midst of immense physical and spiritual suffering and for a mystical union with Christ which granted him miraculous gifts. On occasion, he was able to be in two places at the same time (bilocation) whilst in the confessional he was granted the ability to see the true state of a penitent's soul. Padre Pio's physical suffering led him to establish homes for the relief of suffering whilst his spiritual suffering encouraged him to set up prayer groups to spiritually sustain the patients in their care.

As news of Padre Pio's unique gifts and charism spread, pilgrims flocked to San Giovanni in their hundreds of thousands and this forced the church to ascertain the veracity of his character and vocation. On June 9, 1931, the Feast of Corpus Christi, Padre Pio was ordered by the Holy See to refrain from all activities except the private celebration of Mass. Padre Pio humbly submitted to his superiors and eventually restored in all his priestly faculties. By the early 1960s, he was attracting pilgrims from across the world and they came in such numbers that a new church, Santa Maria delle Grazie, had to be built to accommodate them. By the time the church was completed, Padre Pio's always precarious health began to deteriorate. He died in the early hours of September 23rd 1968, shortly after making his confession and renewing his religious vows.

Following his death, Padre Pio's cult continued to grow; over six million pilgrims visit his shrine in San Giovanni every year. In 2004, an even bigger church, the Padre Pio Pilgrimage Church, was opened to accommodate the influx. The small town is also home to one of the finest hospitals in Italy, constructed at his behest and paid for by donations made by pilgrims. 

Padre Pio was canonised in 2002 by Saint Pope John Paul II who named him "a living image of Christ suffering and risen". [2]

[1] Colossians 1:24 (Magnificat, September 2015, p330)
[2] Magnificat, September 2015, p331

Charlie comes to Swansea

Last weekend, I unfortunately came across an example of the sort of irreverence towards religious sensitivities that the recent #JeSuisCharlie event would have accept as legitimate expressions of freedom of speech.

Statue at Noah's Yard, Swansea

Whilst visiting Noah's Yard, a bar in Swansea, I came across a large statue of the Sacred Heart upon which a gas mask and a sign indicating the direction of the toilets had been hung. My mind was immediately drawn towards Luke 22:63 - "And the men that held him, mocked him, and struck him. And they blindfolded him, and smote his face. And they asked him, saying: Prophesy, who is it that struck thee? And blaspheming, many other things they said against him."

My immediate feelings were not those of anger but sadness so rather than attempt to remove the gas mask and sign, I resolved to write a letter (included below) to the proprietor to try and make him or her understand why seeing the statue of our Lord disposed in such a manner affected me so profoundly. I have waited for a week for a response and, as I have not received one, I have decided to publish this blog post. 

Before I wrote the letter, I had to be sure that my objections were reasonable as I began to wonder if I would have condoned the display of a non-religious statue in such a manner. What if the statue had been of a politician, a member of the royal family or a celebrity? I tend to think that had that been the case, I probably would have brushed the display off as being bizarre, possibly distasteful but perhaps legitimate satire, not worthy of a letter.

I do however think there is an important distinction between the statue of Christ on one hand and my hypothetical examples on the other. The first is that the original purpose of the statue, namely religious worship, is being subverted by it's context and adorning and this constitutes at best religious insensitivity and at worst a direct assault on Christian belief itself. I do think God has a sense of humour and I am not adverse to religious jokes or memes which use images of Christ but I believe this instance goes beyond well intentioned comedy. I would certainly support the right of those who were saddened or angered by the mocking of their own beliefs or revered figures to express their opinions.

Secondly, it is my duty as a Christian to stand for Christ and to redress insults against the Holy Name, not just for His own sake but also for the sake of those who "do not know what they are doing": "whoever denies Me before men will be denied before the angels of God" [1] and "Do not be deceived: God is not mocked, for whatever one sows, that will he also reap". [2] I would be less concerned if particular Catholic or Christian practices were being mocked or satirised but here it is the person of Jesus Christ who is the target. 

Finally, if I remained silent on the matter, it would be yet another instance where such irreverence was left unchallenged. Christ told us that we should "turn the other" cheek but he also asked those who assaulted him at his trail "why do you strike me?". The proprietor may have a right to freedom of speech and expression but so do I and I am choosing to do so in this manner. Freedom of expression is important but it is how we use it that defines our humanity. Why choose to use a freedom which many people throughout the world do not have to mock and ridicule? Though I agree to a certain degree that Christianity is a "soft" and "safe" target for ridicule and mockery, I do not think it is a valid argument to bemoan the apparent bias or fear of those who only pillory certain groups outside of their political, social or moral dispositions. Rather, as Christians, we should ask why people are comfortable mocking and satirising our Faith? I suspect, the answer will be found less in determined opposition based up theological, philosophical or moral precepts and more in our  own behaviour and apathy. 

"Be wise in the way you act toward outsiders; make the most of every opportunity. Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone" [3]

As I say in my letter, it makes no business sense to alienate a section of potential customers. Noah's Yard may as well put up a sign which says "Christians are not welcome here". I certainly shall not be returning there until the statue is removed.  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Sir or Madam, 

Last weekend, encouraged by the experiences of several friends, I paid a visit Noah’s Yard. When I entered, I was greeted with a pleasant and lively atmosphere and felt confident that the venue would live up to its reputation. I was served by polite and engaging staff and sat down with a friend to enjoy a tasty Mojito. 

My first impressions of Noah’s Yard were very favourable but they were totally destroyed when I made my way to the toilets and saw a statue of Jesus upon which a gas mask and a sign indicating the direction of the toilets had been hung. I found the spectacle demeaning, upsetting and an affront to my Christian faith. 

I do not know your motivations for displaying the statue of Jesus in such a manner but I would like to explain why I and others like me may react to it in such a negative way. The heart of Christianity is a personal relationship with God, particularly in the person of Jesus Christ who we believe became man, eventually giving up his own life so that our sins would be forgiven, winning for us the eternal life to which we are all called. When a Christian sees a statue of Jesus displayed in such a manner, they see a friend who they love and have the utmost respect for demeaned and dehumanised. Can you imagine how you might feel if you came across a loved one (a spouse, a child or a parent for example) who was forced to stand in the corner of a bar with a gas mask on their face and a sign for the toilets at their feet? 

I do not think that your motivation for displaying the statue is worth the potential alienation it will cause to others who feel as strongly about the issue as I do, so I hope that you will remove the statue, if not for the potential hurt it may cause then for the sake of your business. Until it is removed, I cannot in good conscience return to your establishment. At your convenience, I would appreciate a reply to my concerns. 

Yours Sincerely, 

Luke O’Sullivan 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Lk 12:9

[2] Galations 6:7
[3] Col 4:5-6

Catholicism and Depression

 
On Tuesday, the world woke up to the news that depression had claimed the life of another well loved celebrity. Robin Williams will forever be remembered as a unique and madcap talent, famous for critically acclaimed films like The Fisher King, Good Morning Vietnam, Insomnia, Good Will Hunting, The Adventures of Baron Munchausen and Awakenings but also for crowd pleasers such as Mrs Doubtfire, Aladdin and Mork and Mindy. Whilst his genius clearly lay in comedy, his acting credits included a range of characters from the psychotic villain of One Hour Photo to the fragile but sympathetic psychologist of Good Will Hunting. It might seem ironic that someone who brought fun and laughter to millions should take their own life but Robin Williams had been battling with depression and drug and alcohol abuse for some time. Perhaps like many, laughter and comedy was a means of keeping the darkness at bay. [1]

Though death, particularly in tragic circumstances, can sometimes lead to somewhat effuse, superfluous hyperbole in eulogy, it appears that Williams was a generous and kindhearted man who was loved by his friends and family. [2] The Beatles suggested that "All you need is love" but that simply is not true. You also need Faith and Hope. People who do decide to take their own lives may no longer have faith in other people or believe that no-one has faith in them. They also do not hope for something better or beyond their suffering.

Sometimes, it is hard to accept depression in a Christian framework. If one is a practising Christian, fully convinced of God's love for them and the complete triumph of Christ on the Cross, what is there to fear? Is depression just a sign of a lack of Faith? Some Christian traditions appear to take this approach seemingly ignorant of Christ's own mental anguish (he was "deeply moved in spirit and troubled" and wept at the death of Lazarus [3]) and the whole tradition of lamentation evident in the Old Testament. "While research shows that some believers can be more resistant to depression... it is also true that some approaches to religion can be associated with higher rates of depression and emotional problems. When evaluating the power of belief to protect against emotional problems, the research seems to show that the question isn't "do you believe?" but rather what do you believe, how, and why?" [4]

The Catholic Church has not always had a complete understanding of suicide because previous generations had little understanding of the psychological causes and impact of depression - it was therefore always analysed in purely spiritual terms. Depression does not leave a person completely devoid of freewill, inexorably fixing them on the path to suicide nor can one overcome it by force of character, joyful obstinacy or a rigorous prayer regimen. As Simcha Fisher suggests, "Many people who are severely depressed are suffering from some combination of spiritual and physical ailments... they are dealing with some things that are out of their control and some things that are within their control... they need sacrificial love and patience from friends and family, and also some kind of hard work and self-knowledge in order to make it through the dark times."  [5] In short, depression is best treated through application of Faith and Reason:

My son, when you are sick do not be negligent,

but pray to the Lord, and he will heal you.

 Give up your faults and direct your hands aright,

and cleanse your heart from all sin.

Offer a sweet-smelling sacrifice, and a memorial portion of fine flour,

and pour oil on your offering, as much as you can afford.

And give the physician his place, for the Lord created him;

let him not leave you, for there is need of him.

There is a time when success lies in the hands of physicians,

for they too will pray to the Lord

that he should grant them success in diagnosis

and in healing, for the sake of preserving life.

He who sins before his Maker,

may he fall into the care of a physician. [6]

Suicide is contrary to the Fifth Commandment and contrary to justice, hope, and charity. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbour because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God." [7] It was often believed to be the one sin for which one could not be forgiven because suicide was committed against Hope and the Holy Spirit - the giver of life [8]. For this reason, those who had committed suicide were often denied a Christian burial.

In the Catholic understanding, particular condemnation is reserved for those who encourage suicide as a viable social norm because all life, regardless of how humanity perceives it's value, is precious to God. This view also takes into account the salvific potential of suffering when united to Christ's passion, death and resurrection. "If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law." [9]

Today, the Church understands that as a person needs to be in full control of their faculties to bear the full responsibility of a sin, the gravity of suicide can be mitigated by its circumstances as "grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide." [10] It also actively encourages the faithful to pray for those who have died in such tragic circumstances: "We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives." [11] For those who are curious, the Patron Saints for those suffering with depression and anxiety are St Jude and St Dymphna whilst a specifically Catholic outlook on depression can be found in The Catholic Guide to Depression by Dr. Aaron Kheriaty and Msgr. John Cihak. [12]

Robin Williams' death is a tragedy devoid of blame or endorsement. It has brought out the voyeuristic worst in our celebrity obsessed culture and media [13] and the downright loathsome abuse of those in grief for a man they loved as friend, husband and father [14]. Christ has taken all suffering offered to Him through his passion, death and resurrection and transformed it - maybe in the manner of his death Robin Williams can convince some who need help to find it, just as they may have found solace in the manner of his life on screen. 

May choirs of angels come to greet him and speed him to paradise. May the Lord enfold him in His mercy. May he find eternal life.

[1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-28753326

[2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-28751241

[3] John 11: 33 -35

[4] http://www.patheos.com/blogs/faithonthecouch/2014/08/dealing-with-depression-getting-the-right-kind-of-help-matters/

[5] http://www.patheos.com/blogs/simchafisher/2014/08/13/faith-reason-depression-and-help/

see http://lifelibertyandcrap.wordpress.com/2014/08/13/guest-postdepressed-catholics-god-wants-you-to-get-help/ also

[6] Sirach 38:9-15

[7] Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2281

[8] Mt 12: 31

[9] Catechism of the Catholic Church, §2282

[10] Ibid

[11] Ibid, §2283

[12] http://www.nationalreview.com/article/372068/getting-free-interview

[13] http://www.themediablog.co.uk/the-media-blog/2014/08/robin-williams-newspaper-coverage.html

[14] http://mashable.com/2014/08/13/zelda-williams-quits-twitter/

The Francis Effect

Resigned to Resignation

I will always remember the morning of 11 February 2013 as one of wildly varied emotion. It started like any other day at work; I'd just got my mid-morning cup of tea and, as was my habbit, I was going to read the Football Transfer Gossip column on the BBC. When I went to the BBC News page however, what I saw filled me consternation - the idiots at the BBC who couldn't get anything right when it came to Catholicism were reporting that Pope Benedict had resigned!

It was only after checking several other websites that I finally had to admit that I had been witness to two unprecedented events: the BBC had reported a story on Catholicism correctly and Pope Benedict had indeed announced his resignation.

After I accept the reality of the resignation, I am afraid to admit that my first sentiments were those of betrayal. I felt that someone who I dearly loved had abandoned me to great uncertainty. It was as if a magnitude 7 earthquake had shook the foundations of my faith, an indication of the great personal investment I had made in the papacy. I sent exclamatory text messages to Catholic friends seeking solace and understanding.

After riding the initial shock, the second emotion I felt was great sadness. As I looked at the pictures of Pope Benedict been streamed by the BBC, I saw a frail and somewhat failing man and this renewed my faith. If Pope Benedict was resigning, being a man of great integrity and intellect, then it would be for the good of the Church.

As I watched the final moments of Benedict XVI's papacy on television on 28 February 2013, this overriding feeling of sadness remained. As he waved his goodbyes from the balcony of Castle Gandolfo, I felt like I was saying goodbye to a good friend who was moving away, never to be seen again.

Habemus Papam

So it was on 13 March 2013 I came to be watching my second Papal election announcement. I'd gained some kudos in work for suggesting Cardinal Ratzinger would succeed Pope John Paul (more wishful thinking than serious conviction) so when the announcement was made in Latin, I had no difficulty recognising who had been made Pope. With the election of Pope Francis however, I had absolutely no idea who George Bergoglio ("Dominum Georgium Marium Sanctæ Romanæ Ecclesiæ Cardinalem Bergoglio") was.

A cursory look however at Wikipedia and a few articles from various news websites such as the Telegraph [1] filled me with optimism and hope. Our new Pope appeared to be a humble but charismatic man, a resolute defender of church teaching who was deeply concerned with social justice and unafraid to tackle the status quo. In short, he appeared to be the perfect man to ensure that "the sacred deposit of Christian doctrine should be guarded and taught more efficaciously [2]" and to tackle the most pressing challenges of the Church: reform of the Curia, the preservation of an authentic Christian voice in western society and governance and the continued development of a robust policy to deal with and eradicate abuse perpetrated by its members.

Failure to communicate

It has been almost a year and a month since Pope Francis was introduced to the world as he stepped onto the balcony of Saint Peter's Basilica and the most enthusiasm and hope I felt has evaporated leaving confusion and doubt, emotions I am unaccustomed to be subject to when considering the papacy.

My main concerns can be summarised as follows:

1) Mixed Messages

 When one examines Francis' speaches and off the cuff remarks, one could be forgiven for thinking they have two authors. I appreciate that the media has a bias towards reporting stories which they feel will promote their own liberal agenda and seem to have a concerted policy to play Francis off against Benedict * but for every story which appears to show Francis robustly defending church teaching, there is another which casts doubt upon it.

* See http://www.buzzfeed.com/ellievhall/who-said-it-pope-benedict-or-pope-francis to see if you can actually differentiate between two

2) Careless Talk

Pope Benedict was very careful with whatever he said but even that didn't ensure that he was (sometimes willfully) misunderstood (e.g. Regensberg and condoms). Pope Francis by constrast seems unnecessarily garrulous, unaware that every word he utters will be dissected and interpreted by all manner of interested parties. What are the consequences of Pope Francis' oratory style? "Who am I to judge?" [3] is fast becoming the banner of dissent (See Fr Z for a plausible take on the phrase [4]) and poor Fr Lombardi, director of the Holy See Press Office, is having to release statements stating that personal and pastoral telephone conversations between the Pope and the faithful do not consistitute an official operation of the teaching authority of the Church. [5]

3) Papal Amnesia

Francis' seemingly careless talk appears to be a consequence of what I believe is an ultimately misguided approach to the Petrine office. As Pope, Francis has frequently referred to himself as Jorge Bergoglio or Fr Bergoglio, as if he can divest himself of his office and then take it back up again. [6] It's possible that in trying to do so, he is forgetting that as Pope, he is no longer dealing with a parish but the worldwide Church. 

Francis has also chosen to favour the appearance of humility over papal custom in his dress (no read shoes or mozzetta) and his desire not to live in the papal apartments. Though humility in office is of course to be lauded, Francis actions are being viewed as a criticism of his "lofty" predecessors [7] and a rejection of church customs which are meant as signs and symbols to the faithful. If Pope Francis appears to undermine the traditions of the papacy, he runs the risk of attempting to be head of the Church via the cult of personality rather than received office.

4) With friends like these

One can often tell much about an individual by the friends one keeps so it is rather alarming that the man dubbed the "Pope's theologian", Cardinal Kasper, is at odds with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. [8] Likewise, Cardinal Lorenzo Baldisseri, the President of the Synod of Bishops who is charged with arranging the Extraordinary Synod on the Pastoral Challenges of the Family in the Context of Evangelization has supported Cardinal Kasper's stance on liberalising Church teaching on remarriage and communion. [9] There's even a suggestion that our own equivocating and faithful bishop blocking Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor has the ear of the Pope. [10] Ches over at the Sensible Bond has also noticed a rather worrying intervention in the election of Bishop McMahon as Archbishop of Liverpool, another man who favours altering Church teaching on marriage, divorce and the Eucharist. He goes so far as to suggest "nobody should be in any doubt now about where Pope Francis wants the Church to go on this issue of Communion for the divorced and remarried". [11] At least Papa Benedict still hangs around the Vatican.

Is this the real life? Is this just fantasy?

I readily admit that the misgivings I have regarding Pope Francis could be totally without merit in fact. I am, after all, making my observations largely through a media lens which I have stated to be unreliable.

Perhaps there is a method to the Pope's actions? He's certainly got everyone talking - maybe he wants all the cards on the table in order to better prepare the Church's pastoral response to the problems of our age? The recent questionnaire on the family which preceeds the Extraordinary Synod on  the Pastoral Challenges of the Family in the Context of Evangelization maybe an example of this policy. If so, the outcomes of the synod should allow Francis to definitely nail his colours to the mast. James Preece certainly hopes so [12].

Likewise, Francis' Council of Cardinals is also beginning to bear fruit. The first tentative steps towards reforming the much maligned and mired Vatican Bank have been taken and the "C8" will soon wade into the marshland of the Curia. [13]

It seems therefore there is hope after all! Francis hasn't changed one iota of Church teaching or promulgated any new developments of doctrine. 

Maybe the real root of my concern is my own lack of Faith?

Tu es Petrus, et super hanc petram ædificabo Ecclesiam meam, et portæ inferi non prævalebunt

Sts Pope John XXIII & Pope John Paul II, Pray for Us!

[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/the-pope/9928637/Pope-Francis-profile-who-is-Argentinas-Jorge-Mario-Bergoglio.html

[2] http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_xxiii/speeches/1962/documents/hf_j-xxiii_spe_19621011_opening-council_lt.html

[3] http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/who-am-i-judge-popes-most-powerful-phrase-2013-f2D11791260

[4] http://wdtprs.com/blog/2014/03/pope-francis-again-who-am-i-to-judge/

[5] http://www.news.va/en/news/fr-lombardi-responds-to-reports-of-popes-call-to-a

[6] http://www.romereports.com/pg156234-pope-to-obama-this-gift-isn-t-from-the-pope-but-from-jorge-mario-bergoglio-en

[7] http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2014/04/11/should-pope-francis-have-abandoned-the-trappings-of-his-office-the-media-image-now-is-of-a-pontiff-rejecting-the-traditions-of-the-church/

[8] http://www.creativeminorityreport.com/2014/05/the-crisis-is-all-in-my-head-part-xvii.html

[9] http://www.lovingit.co.uk/2014/03/a-humanae-vitae-moment.html

[10] http://protectthepope.com/?p=8790
[11] http://thesensiblebond.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/the-popes-men.html

[12] http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1400852.htm

[13] http://www.news.va/en/news/council-of-cardinals-meets-for-fourth-time

Give me a drink...

We are family...

In recent months, following the announcement of an Extraordinary Consistory on the Family, Cardinal Kasper has suggested that the Church might consider permitting second marriages and the admission of individuals in a second marriage to Holy Communion [1]. The Cardinal's comments were born of a genuine crisis in the pastoral mission of the Church as the family, the bedrock of society and image of the Trinity, experiences an identity crisis provoked by the incredible pressures placed upon it by modern life. It was this recognition that prompted Pope Francis to call the consistory and to take a "pastoral census" on issues related to family life. Indeed, the crisis and the fundamental importance of the family was recognised by Cardinal Sodano as he opened the the consistory:
 
"The family nowadays is regarded with disdain and maltreated, and what we ask for is recognition of how beautiful, true and good it is to form a family, to be a family today; how indispensable this is for the life of the world, for the future of humanity." [2]


Holding back the tide

It appears that many within the Church want to submit to the onslaught against the family, recognising its denudation as a fait accompli, establishing in the process a new moral and pastoral basis from which to proceed.

Take for example, Bishop Terence Drainey of Middlesborough who has suggested that the consistory should consider a "radical re-examination of human sexuality that could lead to a development in church teaching in areas such as contraception, homosexuality, divorce and remarriage and cohabitation". [3] Such comments appear patently contrary to Scripture, Tradition and the teaching of the Church but that need not be an insurmountable obstacle if you write for the Tablet which laments the inadequacy of God's plan for the human condition, incredulously suggesting that "the Church has based its teaching about sex, marriage and family life on biblical revelation and natural law... that approach has manifestly failed". [4]
Catholic teaching on marriage and divorce is made clear in the Catechism [5] which bases its understanding on Jesus' own words: "What God has joined together, let no man put asunder" [6] and "Whoever divorces his wife and marries another, commits adultery against her; and if she divorces her husband and marries another, she commits adultery." [7]

On the issue of Communion for remarried divorcees, the comments of Bishop Thomas McMahon of Brentwood usefully summarise the dissenting position where he suggests "provisions could be made for those Catholics [remarried divorcees] to receive the Eucharist in the same way that non-Catholic Christians are permitted to share Communion." [3]

Again, the Catechism rules out this possibility as the civilly remarried "find themselves in a situation that objectively contravenes God’s law... they cannot receive Eucharistic communion as long as this situation persists". [4] As Pope Francis has alluded to, this teaching is not meant as some form of punishment - it is based on the reality of Eucharist itself - the body and blood of Christ. St Paul warns us, "whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and the blood of the Lord". Those who must refrain from the Eucharist for whatever reason are actually paying testament to the reality of the Body and Blood of Christ, a sacrifice which may obtain for them the graces they require to overcome that which necessitates their abstention.


Wishing Well

Cardinal Kasper's comments are not wholly without merit. He gets to the crux of the issue when he juxtaposes the Church's teaching on marriage with its understanding of hope and mercy: “The indissolubility of a sacramental marriage and the impossibility of a new marriage while the other partner is still alive is part of the binding tradition of the faith of the church and cannot be abandoned or dissolved by appealing to a superficial understanding of mercy at a discount price” at the same time, "there is no human situation absolutely without hope or solution” [3]. How are we to achieve a balance between the two?

As always, the answer lies in the person and attitude of our Lord, conveniently put forward in the Gospel of today where He meets the women at Jacob's Well. [8] Jesus begins the encounter by asking the woman for a drink, and uses it as a pretext to reveal himself as the Living Water. The exchange between Jesus and the woman is extraordinary because it reveals the depths of his mercy - he recognises that the woman is a sinner and elicits in her a desire for salvation; when it is she who should be asking him for a drink, Christ's request is an invitation to serve Him. As Jesus gradually allows the women to see who He is and to understand that He is the source of salvation, He also encourages her to confess those things which are obstacle to her, namely the fact that the man she is with is not her husband. Indeed, it is Jesus' knowledge of this that partly convinces the woman of his authenticity - where sin abounds, grace abounds all the more.

The Church has a clear duty to the pastoral needs of those who, like the woman at the well, find themselves in situations which offer a potentially significant impediment to their salvation. This cannot however be at the expense of truths which are at the very heart of the Faith and the wellspring of that salvation. Jesus did not spurn the woman - he was willing to spend time with her and to help her with her doubts and difficulties. Like Christ, we have to be patient and do whatever we can can to encourage others to respond to his invitation, recognising always that we too are sinners, subject to the same reliance on grace and mercy.

[1] http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2014/02/28/cardinal-kasper-told-cardinals-church-could-tolerate-some-second-marriages/
[2] http://visnews-en.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/extraordinary-consistory-on-family.html
[3] http://protectthepope.com/?p=10198
[4] http://www.thetablet.co.uk/editors-desk/1/1747/marriage-and-the-real-world
[5] Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1650
[6] Mark 10:9
[7] Matthew 19:9
[8] 1 Corinthians 11:27
[9] John 4:5-42

To whom shall we go...

This is in tolerable

 

The scene is set in the synagogue at Capernaum. Jesus has just taught his disciples that He is "The Bread of Life". We pick up the narrative :

 

"When many of his disciples heard it, they said, ‘This teaching is difficult; who can accept it?’ But Jesus, being aware that his disciples were complaining about it, said to them, ‘Does this offend you?... The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But among you there are some who do not believe.’

 

Because of this many of his disciples turned back and no longer went about with him. So Jesus asked the twelve, ‘Do you also wish to go away?’ Simon Peter answered him, ‘Lord, to whom can we go?' [1] And Jesus said to them "In the future, men shall be able to go to your successors, to lament my teaching and they, desiring a quiet life, will heed their cries, silencing those who offend with my teaching".

 

Silence of the lambs

 

This as yet undiscovered passage sheds light of the rather troubling news that a prominent Catholic blogger, Deacon Nick Donnolly of ProtectThePope.org, has been asked to refrain from blogging and observe a period of prayer and penance by his own bishop, Bishop Campbell of Lancaster. [2]

 

I am all for bishops constructively disciplining errant members of their flock but Deacon Connolly's analysis of events, if sometimes rather brash and perhaps lacking in the compassion which would be required for authentic dialogue, is right out of the pages of Catechism. Under Holy Obedience, Deacon Donnolly has rightly submitted to the request of his Bishop and I hope that in time, he will be allowed to continue his posts.

 

As I understand it, ProtectThePope.org was set up prior to the visit of Pope Benedict to the UK as a bulwark to the nonsense which was being reported in the media regarding the Pontiff. After the visit, it expanded it's brief somewhat to cover issues of dissent across the whole church, becoming in the process a sentinel for many who self identify as traditionalists. 

 

A read through ProtectThePope.org can be a rather depressing foray into Catholic blogging. The nature of its remit doesn't leave much room for posts which will enrich one's spiritual life (unless one is inclined to wax lyrical about the ordinariate or Extraordinary Form Mass in the comments section) and it does have the unfortunate tendency to foster a self-satisfied orthodoxy amongst its readership. For all these shortcomings however, I unfortunately recognise that given the current climate of dissent from church teaching, the blog does fulfil a purpose (I say unfortunately because divisions within the Church are a terrible blight on its mission to evangelise). The battle for future of the Church is increasingly being played out in the media and those faithful to the authentic teaching of Christ need voices that understand the terms of engagement.

 

The Usual Suspects

 

As Deacon Donnolly spends his time in prayer and reflection on his enforced gardening leave, his treatment is all the more galling as it is difficult to imagine a dissenting blogger being dealt with in a similar fashion. I recognise that the care of souls sometimes requires that the reeds blow in the wind but we have to stop short of breaking those reeds if the totality of the Faith is to be preserved and observed. Groups like ACTA (which include clergy) who are openly pursuing causes of dissent, thus undermining the teaching authority of the Church, appear to be given free reign in many diocese.

The Church will gain nothing by making accommodations on issues of dissent with the world. The world cannot reciprocate as it nothing to offer which could possibly ameliorate the loss of the Church's very identity. The more the Church acquiesces, the less relevant it will become, indistinguishable from a thousand other well meaning but ultimately impotent institutions - a vision of the Church which Pope Francis' has rejected as inconsequential NGO. 

 

[1] John 6: 60

[2] http://protectthepope.com/?p=10156

God's gift and Man's best friend

Last month I sadly lost one of my best friends. We'd been inseparable since I was 16, regularly going for walks in the parks and on the beaches around Swansea, playing in the garden after school or work, staying up late to watch Match of the Day or to pray the rosary. He was often the first to greet me in the morning and the last to say good night before I went to bed. When I was sad, he cheered me up. When I was stressed he helped me to relax. When I was in pain, he helped me bear the burden. When I was happy, he shared my joy. When he passed away, I sobbed for a good hour and though I have nothing but happy memories of our time together, I feel the loss most acutely in the little things. I can no longer expect to see him strolling up the drive to meet me after work or to literally chew the bacon on a Saturday morning nor can I pay him a visit when I'm troubled and can't sleep. His name was Buzz and he was the best of buddies.

Buzz in his prime

I get an immense amount of spiritual consolation from the natural world, be it in marvelling at the grandeur of the cosmos, the intricacies of the laws of physics, a beautiful panorama or amazing animal. This appreciation is so strong that for me, it is an irrefutable proof of God's existence. It is a grace which is not given to all but without which I may have struggled in my Faith. "Credo ut intelligam",  "I believe that I may understand", as St Anselm says.

Some of my favourite stories about the saints include their interaction with animals. St Francis is well known for his great love for nature and this love was expressed most beautifully in his Canticle of Creation, Brother Sun and Sister Moon. Saint Francis' inspiration for the canticle was undoubtedly Daniel 3:57-88, one of my favourite bible passages, where creation itself is called upon to worship the creator:

And you, sun and moon, O bless The Lord,

And you, the stars of the heavens, O bless The Lord,

And you, showers and rain, O bless The Lord.

To him be highest glory and praise forever.

The "Fioretti" or "little flowers" of Saint Francis, a collection of hagiographical stories on the life of the saint, are filled with anecdotes of his interaction with creation. My  favourite tales include the story of the Wolf of Gubbio who Francis convinced to protect rather than terrorise the local village by shaking its paw, a dance to music supplied by crickets and a sermon to the birds. The Franciscans have retained Francis' fascination with nature in their art and culture and I am reminded of a beautiful Franciscan Church in Rome (the name escapes me, as do the pictures I took of it) which has frescoes of the Stations of the Cross which depict animals tending to the wounds of Christ as he moves towards Cavalry. I like to think that we were originally designed to have a far deeper relationship with nature and creation but that bond has been damaged by the spiritual turmoil which ensued after The Fall. Saints like Francis offer us a glimpse of how we might have been, better able to interpret the natural world and act accordingly.

Buzz and Brother Snarf

One of the first things I remember studying as part of my Theology & Philosophy A-Level was St Thomas Aquinas' teachings on matter and form. We looked at the difference between anima or spirit and a rational soul and marvelled at the vagarious implications for the created order. For example, plants have spirits (which maybe why my father talks to his tomatoes and why children play with food) and each angel is effectively its own species. Contrary to received wisdom and with great concern, we learned that according to Aquinas, All Dogs Do Not Go to Heaven as this was the dwelling place of rational souls worthy of the beatific vision.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church suggests that "the seventh commandment enjoins respect for the integrity of creation. Animals, like plants and inanimate beings, are by nature destined for the common good of past, present, and future humanity." [1] To put it briefly, the whole of creation is designed to give glory to God and serve mankind in its earthly existence. Man's dominion over nature is evidenced in the Genesis creation stories where each animal is brought forth to be named by Adam but this dominion is not inalienable - creation belongs first and foremost to God and Man's dominion therefore includes a duty of stewardship. The Catechism tells us that "God surrounds animals with his providential care" and that by their mere existence, they are able to bless and give Him glory. A dog can be no more or less a dog; it fulfills its nature of doginess perfectly. We therefore "owe animals our kindness" and it is "contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly". [2] It is however possible to anthropomorphise animals to such a degree that it undermines both human dignity and the dignity of animals within the created order. It is truly exasperating to see people treating animals like human babies or children. It is certainly possible to love animals without directing the kind of affection which is properly due to people.

So where does this leave Buzz? We do not know what the New Heaven and the New Earth will look like but we do know that the bodily resurrection applies only to those rational souls who have died in Christ. I like to think however that in the resurrection, we shall take with us all that is good in this life, having shed all that is bad. This would certainly include my memories of Buzz and the "good" of creation itself. Perhaps there is hope too from the Book of Revelation which describes the heavenly liturgy where "every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea...", cries out: "To the one who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honour, glory and power, forever and ever"[3] Maybe Buzz is sharing a truce with the glorious postmen of heaven, praising God before his throne. Failing that, I'll just imagine he is happy chasing squirrels in Elysium. I wonder what he will do if he ever catches one?

Buzz enjoying the snow

[1] Catechism of the Catholic Catholic Church, 2415

[2] ibid, 2416-2417

[3] Revelation 5:13

The "New" Rite Mass: The Source of all evils?

Fellow compatriot Ragazza Gallese's most recent blog post [1] offers a lot of food for thought regarding the the relationship between good theology, catechisis and liturgical practice. In it, she exasperates that she is "sick to the back teeth of hearing people complain about clergy who turned (and continue to turn) a blind eye to abortion, contraception, cohabitation, divorce" but still "still regularly (and freely) attend a mass where [there] is ... clapping, ... singing of various dodgy hymns, Communion on the hand, immodest clothing worn by young (and some not so young) girls, ... no catechesis, where the priest celebrates mass with his back to the Blessed Sacrament, .. where lay people distribute Holy Communion as if they were themselves priests, where said lay people then stand around a table and drink what is left of the Precious Blood as if they were finishing off the last dregs of a pint, where confession is rarely available and where the Sanctuary (and indeed the whole church) has been stripped bare of anything that might remind you of the Holy Sacrifice".

I sympathise with much of what she has to say post but am alarmed by the prospect of creating a two tier church of "us and them", a profoundly un-Catholic concept for a Universal Church. I am well aware that there is a de facto split in the Church, largely centred around issues of morality, but allowing these differences to be entrenched in parish life will eventually lead to schism. I could never be an Anglican because accepting diametrically opposed theology makes absolutely no sense.

From my experience, orthodoxy and reverence are in no way intrinsically opposed to Mass in the New Rite. I accept that liturgical malpractice has proliferated under the reformed liturgy but it is disingenuous to suggest that they never occurred under the Old Rite. It is not beyond the realms of plausibility to suggest that it is the lack of belief and true understanding of the Mass that is responsible for the liturgical abuses - I'm quite sure if Rome decreed that every Mass should take place under the Old Rite then liturgical abuse would continue to take place.

One's own soul must take precedence in matters of salvation as one is unlikely to effect the salvation of others if one is in danger of losing Faith. If such a scenario were to arise over the type of Mass at one's local parish then finding a new parish would certainly be warranted. For those of us not in such a situation, if we want to effect change in the Church and promote a more appropriate liturgy which greater reflects the splendour and glory of what actually takes places at every Mass (reverent or irreverent thank God! [2]), then we need to be in our parishes, working for change. 

I suspect that poor catechesis for both priest and laity alike are at the root of these liturgical abuses. It would be impossible to perform poor liturgy if one has a true understanding of what take place at every Mass and this is where those who have received such a grace can help their fellow parishioners. After all, deliberate liturgical abuse is tantamount to "eating the bread", or "drinking the chalice of the Lord" unworthily, a sin which incurs the most grievous guilt of the body and of the blood of the Lord. To be truly culpable of such a sin is grave indeed. Without wishing to be condescending, those with greater depth of understanding regarding the Mass have a duty to help those who do not. If you are interested in developing your understanding of the Mass, I recommend starting with "What Happens at Mass" by Jeremy Driscoll OSB [3]. It's a short and very readable book, which is quite profound in its simplicity.

Speaking mainly as a thirty-something-singleton, I don't know where Ragazza Gallese's opinions on liturgy have been formed but perhaps she too feels left rather bereft by life as a Catholic in Wales. I regularly attend Mass in either one of two local parishes and, while I am thankful for two priests of excellent but different charisms, I cannot shake the feeling that we are rather impoverished in terms of cultural life when compared to some of the parishes I have attending when visiting friends in England. In this however I truly am to blame because I am not making any effort to affect change, nor have I gone out of my way to look for opportunities to support my Faith. Perhaps it's time I made a start...

Addendum 
In thinking more about the issues raised here, I was reminded of letter XVI in C.S. Lewis's Screwtape letters. There the erstwhile demon writes to his diabolical nephew:

Surely you know that if a man can't be cured of churchgoing, the next best thing is to send him all over the neighbourhood looking for the church that "suits" him until he becomes a taster or connoisseur of churches.

... The parochial organisation should always be attacked, because, being a unity of place and not of likings, it brings people of different classes and psychology together in the kind of unity the Enemy desires. The congregational principle, on the other hand, makes each church into a kind of club, and finally, if all goes well, into a coterie or faction.

I have already written a little about my university experiences and how liturgy became a divisive topic in Oxford [4] and the final statement from Screwtape describes the results perfectly - certain individuals used the Church and the liturgy to develop their own exclusive club from which they could condescendingly regard those who were not part of it. I am not suggesting that this is the ultimate end for all those who start down the path but it is at least a possible destination. It is a temptation to which I have been guilty of indulging in the past, as I felt a certain superiority to liberal Catholics or Protestants. Thankfully, my University experience forced me to venture outside of the artificial bubble of orthodoxy to which I belonged and I met individuals in whom the Holy Spirit was clearly at work, even though I sometimes  had profound disagreements with their opinions on particular issues. I hope those experiences have remedied that fault in my character - one down and many more to go!

[1] http://ragazzagallese.wordpress.com/2013/11/18/do-you-know-the-blog-post-here-comes-the-rant/
[2] http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/what-does-the-expression-ex-opere-operato-mean
[3] http://www.acnuk.org/products.php/70/what-happens-at-mass
[4] http://lucascambrensis.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/liturgical-wars.html

Liturgical Wars

It's all just a little bit of history repeating...

One of the most common themes which crops up in Catholic Blogs and on Twitter is that of Liturgy. As with most inter-ecclesiastical strife, the battleground is demarcated by the interpretation of the documents of the Second Vatican Council and the fault line between protagonists is invariably drawn along liberal and traditional axioms. If Sacrosanctum Concilium was the assassination of Franz Ferdinand and Pope Benedict's Motu Proprio on the Use of the Roman Liturgy was the Treaty of Versaille, we find ourselves living in the uneasy peace of the Weimar Republic as Pope Francis' ability to escape pigeon-holing leads to rumour and intrigue over the direction of his predecessor's reforms.

It is to be expected that any discussion of liturgical practice will evoke strong passions. Mass is after all a celebration which transcends space and time, making present to us Christ's sacrifice on the Cross and the heavenly worship of God as glimpsed by St John in the Book of Revelation. Though an "action of the whole Christ" and an expression of the unity of the body of Christ, as liturgy touches on man's capacity for art and expression, it necessarily embodies a profoundly personal experience, subject to an individual's own tastes and preferences. As the Catechism states, "integrated into the world of faith and taken up by the power of the Holy Spirit, these cosmic elements, human rituals, and gestures of remembrance of God become bearers of the saving and sanctifying action of Christ." [1] Liturgy actually contributes to our salvation, acting as a conduit of grace:

You have no need of our praise,
yet our desire to thank You is itself Your gift.
Our prayer of thanksgiving adds nothing to Your greatness,
but makes us grow in Your grace,
through Jesus Christ our Lord. [2]

Colours of Swansea Bay

Before attending University, I had never really given the liturgy much thought, largely because most of the Masses I attended in Wales were rather generic. To this day, my experiences lead me to believe that there is no discernible Catholic liturgical tradition in Wales - when juxtaposed with my attendance of Mass in England, I am often left feeling spiritual impoverished. I suspect that the overwhelming success of the Reformation in Wales together with English determination to suppress Welsh culture is largely responsible for this phenomenon. Lacking metropolitan centres of ecclesiastical influence, Wales relied heavily on its monasteries for its Catholic identity and their utter destruction forever shaped our spiritual destiny. English Catholicism can freely peruse the back-catalogue of her High-Anglican sister for inspiration but the triumph of  Non-Conformism in Wales perhaps makes liturgical borrowing theologically onerous. It was only on leaving Wales to attend youth conferences or to go to University that I was exposed to the broad tradition of Catholic liturgy, including fundamentally basic practices such as the Divine Office.

This is not to say however I had no opinions on liturgy and music at Mass. As an alter server, I noted that our Parish priest was adamant that the defining characteristics of Mass liturgy should be dignity and appropriateness to the current season. The Easter and Christmas celebrations always filled me with wonder and awe and as I grew older, I began to appreciate how essential it was for liturgy, particularly with regards to music, to reflect the reality of the Mass. I had quite an eclectic taste in music which covered a wide spectrum of styles from rock to opera (excluding rap and R&B) but recognised that what I enjoyed listening to in my spare time would not always be appropriate at Mass. As for the form of Mass, I may have had a vague understanding that an "Old Rite" had preceded the existing form but I had no knowledge of how it differed other than the priest facing the altar rather (a fact gleaned from old prayer cards) and the language being Latin. I can't recall when I first attended an ordinary form Mass in Latin - it may have been arranged as part of my Latin studies when I was fifteen - but I do remember that I very much enjoyed the experience. Up until that point I was rather sceptical of the notion because virtually everyone I met who professed an affinity for the Latin Mass was either a schismatic or, quite frankly, rather odd.

Perhaps the single most informative liturgical experience of my teenage years came via a week long mission which the Headmaster had invited to our school. I'm not sure if the energetic mission team was Catholic or not but their razzmatazz, rock star presentation was everything I had come to loathe in "Catholic Youth Ministry". I felt rather than attempting to stimulate Faith, they fed us emotion and I am firmly convinced that is poor soil for spiritual growth. This was evidenced in the feedback session at the end of the mission - the Sixth Form complained the team were attempting to brainwash the younger pupils who in turn enthused that they thoroughly enjoyed the "performances" but wished there was less religion involved. The "show piece" Mass left me incredulous and deeply hurt as a priest who later claimed to be an expert in "liturgy for children" broke every rule in the book as he neglected set prayers, invented rites and gave the missionary team carte blanche in asserting themselves over the Mass. The recollection of  liturgical dance from the leotarded GCSE drama troupe, the rendition of U2's "Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For" (one of my favourite songs) and the third Offertory prayer beseeching God to "Bless this money" still makes me cringe. I left school with the conviction that guitars, tambourines, drum kits, beanbags and gaudy posters had no place in the celebration of Mass.

Attack of the Drones

One of great advantages of being a Catholic in Oxford is that Mass is readily available throughout the day, every day. I could attend Littlemore, Greyfriars, Blackfriars, St Aloysius Gonzaga (The Oratory), Holy Rood, Grandpont House or The Catholic Chaplaincy. During the week, I attended Mass where ever best fitted in with my studies but I had a preference for the Oratory because of the style of the Church and the opportunity to hear Mass in Latin. Aesthetically, the worst place to attend Mass was The Catholic Chaplaincy (the main hall is used for well attended Masses and it is a concrete structure more suited to a car park or aircraft hanger) but I always attended Mass there on a Sunday as it was the centre of Catholic Student life and where I met all my best University friends. The Chaplaincy could never compete with the grandeur of the Oxford College Chapels but the liturgy there was dignified whilst the chapel was also very peaceful, prayerful and perfect for post study adoration. Oxford also gave me the opportunity to attend Mass according to the Old Roman and Byzantine Rites, both of which I found intriguing, mysterious and beautiful.

It was within this environment that I first experienced the true vitriol and snobbery that can accompany liturgical preference. There was a not inconsequential group of students who attended The Oratory who would refuse to attend Mass at the Chaplaincy or be part of the Catholic Society. That was of course their prerogative but during meetings of overlapping societies such as the Newman Society which was often held in The Old Palace which adjoins the Catholic Chaplaincy, some would routinely disparage anyone associated with the Chaplaincy. Mass at the Chaplaincy they claimed was "barely valid" and anyone who attended it was clearly a "liberal". I suspect that for the most vociferous of this group, attending Mass at the Oratory had little to do with Faith - it was rather an extension of their class pretensions. Exclusivity is an extremely sought after commodity in Oxford and the Oratory, with its collection of academics, intellectuals, barristers and corporates and Catholicism in general created yet another clique for them to invest in.

Though it might be claimed that Oxford is microcosm and that these traits do not extended to the rest of the country, my experiences since suggest otherwise. A summary of the worst of these idiosyncrasies include:

1) Liturgical Fetishism - A concern for vestments and liturgical aids which borders on the profane
2) Determining Orthodoxy by liturgical preference
3) Questioning the validity of Novus Ordo Masses
4) Snobbish dismissal of the Faith of others
5) Hypersensitivity to poor liturgical practice
6) A propensity to judge spiritual progress on how Mass makes one feel
7) A tendency to link the Usus Antiquior and High Novus Order Masses with the concept of being English


In highlighting these idiosyncrasies, I do not mean to imply that everyone who attends an Old Rite Mass shares in them. The vast majority of people I converse with on Twitter who attend an Usus Antiquior Mass are thoroughly reasonable folk who do so for their own spiritual nourishment. Indeed, I sympathise greatly with their claims that a return to the Usus Antiquior eradicates the worst of the horrific liturgical abuses which occur under the novus ordo and that certain signs and symbols such as the ad orientem aspect of the priest better present the mysteries of the Mass to the congregation. Whatever the reasons behind a preference for a certain type of liturgy, the upshot is that protagonists are effectively creating a "church within a church", where local parishes are abandoned in favour of one where Mass is said "properly", thus polarising opinion and practice even further.

Gentlemen prefer Lauds


Throughout these musings, I have frequently used the term "liturgical preference" but I'm not sure this is useful terminology. Preference involves a subjective choice and though everyone is bound to find certain liturgical practices appealing or not, there should be a certain level of objectivity in all liturgy. Mass has an objective basis in the Sacrifice of Christ and takes its form from the events of Last Supper to the Resurrection on Easter Sunday together with what has been revealed to us in the Book of Revelation:

"A throne stood in heaven, with one seated on the throne": "the Lord God." It then shows the Lamb, "standing, as though it had been slain": Christ crucified and risen, the one high priest of the true sanctuary, the same one "who offers and is offered, who gives and is given." [3]

St John goes on to describe this liturgy in great detail complete with explanations of signs and symbols and accompanying prayers. The result is an act of worship which has been imparted to us by Divine Revelation, the prototype for every Mass.

I believe that there is objective line that can be drawn which determines if a Mass is dignified and appropriate or not; I'm just not sure how that line can be drawn and how relevant cultural norms are to the decision. I can say that I have a preference for the novus ordo Mass in Latin, with the readings in the vernacular accompanied by traditional hymns and the priest facing ad orientam but to what extent can I say that any of these things would be objectively good for the whole of the Faithful?

Out of Africa

I have already described my intense dislike of the guitar and drums at Mass and for a long time I thought there should be a universal moritorium in their use at Mass. My opinions however changed after attending a few Masses for African and Asian Communities and seeing how the expression of their culture in their liturgy was an immense outpouring of their Faith. I am sure they felt as bemused at what must seem very sombre Mass in Britain as I did at their energetic and lively Masses but at least we share the same conviction that no matter the circumstances, Mass is Mass, recognisable the world over. I'm not sure how these communities celebrated Mass before the novus ordo but I think it would be quite an injustice if the usus antiquior was forced upon them or if they were judged by British standards of appropriateness. 

Question Time

I suppose my views on the liturgy, shaped as they are by past experience, lead to more questions that answers. I believe that there should be an objective norm for liturgical practice at Mass but that it is culturally specific. Who is responsible for deciding where that norm lies and how do they justify their decision? Is it logically impossible for me to insist that what I consider to be cheesy pop music has no place in Mass but accept that the use of the guitar and folk songs is perfectly legitimate practice for different cultures? Should people who are irked by a particular liturgy just grin and bear it or are they justified in nomadic Mass attendance for greater spiritual benefit? Whatever the answer to these questions (please chip in if you have some!), I am convinced that good liturgy is of great importance and that the fault in the life of the Church along liturgical lines is a poor evangelical witness.

[1] http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s1c2a1.htm#1189
[2] Preface of Weekdays in Ordinary Time IV
[3] http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p2s1c2a1.htm#1137