Catholic Metanarrative

Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Wednesday Liturgy: When to Set Up Christmas Decorations

ROME, NOV. 29, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

Q: What would you consider an appropriate time during Advent to put up Christmas trees, ornaments, lights and other decorations in churches and Christian homes? -- B.O., Lewistown, Pennsylvania

A: This question is simple only in appearance because customs surrounding the celebration of Christmas vary widely among different cultures.

From a strictly liturgical standpoint the preparations for receiving the Christ Child intensify from Dec. 17 onward and this is probably a good time to set up the parish crib, except for the image of the child, which is often added just before Midnight Mass in more or less solemn fashion.

Other parishes prefer to set up the crib on Christmas Eve. There are no official rites regarding this widespread custom.

In those places that use the Advent wreath, it is placed on the first Sunday of Advent. The Book of Blessings issued by the U.S. bishops' conference contains a simple rite for blessing the Advent wreath which may profitably be used.

Dec. 17 or the nearest Sunday might also be a good date to set up Christmas trees and other decorations in Christian homes, but it really depends on local custom and tradition. It is unnecessary, however, to fall under the spell of commercial enterprises which tend to anticipate the Christmas season, sometimes even before Advent begins.

Because some Christmas decorations have often lost their original religious meaning, churches should be rather circumspect about employing them and should do so with great discretion. If used at all, these decorations are best set up on Christmas Eve so as to respect the integrity of the Advent season.

Christmas trees are preferably located outside the sanctuary and church proper, and are best left in vestibules or church grounds. This has been the practice in St. Peter's Square from the time of Pope John Paul II.

As far as possible, decorations should be religiously themed, leaving plastic reindeer, sugar canes and Santa Clauses in the local shopping mall or at least within the confines of the parish hall for children's events.

Within the church proper, apart from the crib, Christmas may be evoked by using, for example, traditional poinsettias, holly and other traditional elements according to the culture.

As I mentioned, different cultures celebrate Christmas in various ways.

In some countries, such as Venezuela, many people live the novena before Christmas by attending a special "Cockcrow" Mass celebrated at 5 a.m. each day.

In Mexico, during this same period, family and neighbors often take turns in hosting a "posada," a procession in which the group goes from house to house singing a traditional song in which St. Joseph and Mary request, and are refused, hospitality until finally they are festively welcomed at the last home, which has prepared snacks and traditional games for all.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Funeral Masses

ROME, NOV. 29, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

A New Zealand reader asked for clarifications regarding our mention of Canon 1184 that "those who requested cremation for motives contrary to the Christian faith" were not to be given a Church funeral (see Nov. 15).

She asks: "Can you please tell me what motives for cremation might be considered contrary to Christian faith?"

The proviso in this canon is presumably rarely actually invoked. A person would only incur such a prohibition if, before death, he or she requested cremation explicitly and publicly motivated by a denial of some aspect of Christian faith regarding life after death.

Among possible such motivations would be a lack of faith in the survival of the immortal soul and thus requesting cremation to emphasize the definitiveness of death. Another could be the denial of belief in the resurrection of the dead.

More recently, some nominal Catholics who have dabbled in New Age pantheism or believe in doctrines such as reincarnation or migration of souls might request cremation in order to follow these esoteric doctrines or the customs of some Eastern religions.

In all such cases the motivation for seeking cremation is contrary to Catholic doctrine and, if this fact is publicly known, performing a Church funeral could cause scandal or imply that holding to Church doctrine is really not that important.

Since one or two questions arose from our follow-up on confession and Christian initiation (see Nov. 1 and 15) I wish to address the topic one more time.

One reader posed a theological teaser to our statement that "If conditional baptism is foreseen, the confession should be postponed until a suitable time after the celebration, since certainty is required in questions regarding the validity of the sacraments."

He asked: "However, if the conditional baptism is administered at the Easter Vigil [as is often the case], it will immediately be followed by confirmation and first Communion. It would seem that the candidate should receive a conditional absolution before receiving these sacraments."

Our reader has a valid point, but I do not think that such a practice is appropriate. Although hearing confessions is allowed during Mass, there is a general law that the sacrament of penance is never combined with the celebration of Mass in such a way that it forms part of the rite itself.

Cases of conditional baptism are relatively rare, and the doubt regarding the previous "baptism" is usually well founded. There is almost nothing regarding this precise theme in theological manuals. Yet I think that the conditional baptism, either because it is the first true baptism, or in virtue of the Church's intention if the person was already validly baptized, will have the effect of placing the person in the state of grace and able to fruitfully receive the sacraments of confirmation and Eucharist.

We could consider it as somewhat analogous to a person who returns to the state of grace though an act of perfect contrition. In normal circumstances this is still insufficient to accede to the sacraments until after receiving sacramental absolution. In certain extraordinary circumstances, however, a person may receive some sacraments before confession if there is no possible alternative and confess later at the earliest opportunity.

A Houston reader requested clarification regarding confessing a member of the Eastern Churches: "With respect to confessions of the Eastern Orthodox, can the priest absolve them for the sin of schism if the priest is not receiving the penitent into the Catholic Church? Does it matter whether the individual was baptized by an Orthodox priest or is a Catholic who has left the Catholic Church for an Orthodox Church? There are many Catholics who leave the Catholic Church for Orthodox Churches, and I am curious to know whether they can receive absolution from a Catholic priest while remaining Orthodox."

We need to consider several points. Sin always involves a personal choice made with full deliberation and knowledge. For this reason it is not reasonable to say that a person who was born and raised in an Eastern Church is personally guilty of the sin of schism.

This is one probable reason why the Church makes no mention of this aspect when granting permission for a Catholic priest to administer the sacraments to them.

The case of a Catholic who has left the Church is in a different position and, except in cases of danger of death, would normally have to be reconciled with the Church before receiving absolution.

For the sake of precision, we would be dealing with a Catholic who has abandoned the Catholic Church, thus breaking communion with the Pope and bishops, and not that of a Latin-rite Catholic who switches rites to one of the Eastern Catholic Churches.

Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Article: Experts Decry Decline of Good Etiquette

WASHINGTON (Donna Cassata, The Associated Press) - Americans' fast-paced, high-tech existence has taken a toll on civility. From road rage in the morning commute to high decibel cell-phone conversations that ruin dinner out, men and women behaving badly have become the hallmark of a hurry-up world.

An increasing informality - flip-flops at the White House, even - combined with self-absorbed communication gadgets and a demand for instant gratification have strained common courtesies to the breaking point.

"All of these things lead to a world with more stress, more chances for people to be rude to each other," said Peter Post, a descendent of etiquette expert Emily Post and an instructor on business manners through the Emily Post Institute in Burlington, Vt.

In some cases, the harried single parent has replaced the traditional nuclear family and there's little time to teach the basics of polite living, let alone how to hold a knife and fork, according to Post.

A slippage in manners is obvious to many Americans. Nearly 70 percent questioned in an Associated Press-Ipsos poll said people are ruder than they were 20 or 30 years ago. The trend is noticed in large and small places alike, although more urban people report bad manners, 74 percent, then do people in rural areas, 67 percent.

Peggy Newfield, founder and president of Personal Best, said the generation that came of age in the times-a-changin' 1960s and 1970s are now parents who don't stress the importance of manners, such as opening a door for a female.

So it was no surprise to Newfield that those children wouldn't understand how impolite it was to wear flip-flops to a White House meeting with the president - as some members of the Northwestern women's lacrosse team did in the summer.

A whopping 93 percent in the AP-Ipsos poll faulted parents for failing to teach their children well.

"Parents are very much to blame," said Newfield, whose Atlanta-based company started teaching etiquette to young people and now focuses on corporate employees. "And the media."

Sulking athletes and boorish celebrities grab the headlines while television and Hollywood often glorify crude behavior.
"It's not like the old shows 'Father Knows Best,'" said Norm Demers, 47, of Sutton, Mass. "People just copy it. How do you change it?" Demers would like to see more family friendly television but isn't holding his breath.

Nearly everyone has a story of the rude or the crude, but fewer are willing to fess up to boorish behavior themselves.
Only 13 percent in the poll would admit to making an obscene gesture while driving; only 8 percent said they had used their cell phones in a loud or annoying manner around others. But 37 percent in the survey of 1,001 adults questioned Aug. 22-23 said they had used a swear word in public.

Yvette Sienkiewicz, 41, a claims adjustor from Wilmington, Del., recalled in frustration how a bigger boy cut in front of her 8-year-old son as he waited in line to play a game at the local Chuck E. Cheese.

"It wasn't my thing to say something to the little boy," said Sienkiewicz, who remembered that the adult accompanying the child never acknowledged what he had done. In the AP-Ipsos poll, 38 percent said they have asked someone to stop behaving rudely.

More and more, manners are taught less and less.

Carole Krohn, 71, a retired school bus driver in Deer Park, Wash., said she has seen children's behavior deteriorate over the years, including one time when a boy tossed a snowball at the back of another driver's head. In this litigious society, she argued, a grown-up risks trouble correcting someone else's kid.

One solution for bad behavior "is to put a kid off in the middle of the road. Nowadays all people want to do is sue, to say you're to blame, get you fired," Krohn said.

Krohn, who often greeted students by name and with a hearty "good morning," once was asked by a child if she got tired of offering pleasantries.

Sienkiewicz, whose job requires hours in a car, said she tries to avoid rush-hour traffic because of drivers with a me-first attitude. The most common complaint about rudeness in the poll was aggressive or reckless driving, with 91 percent citing it as the most frequent discourtesy.

Margaret Hahn-Dupont, a 39-year-old law professor from Oradell, N.J., noticed that some of her students showed little respect for authority and felt free to express their discontent and demand better grades.

Close on the heels of the baby boomers are the affluent teens and young adults who have known nothing but the conveniences of computers and cell phones, devices that take them away from face-to-face encounters and can be downright annoying in a crowd.

"They got a lot of things and feel entitled to get a lot of things," said Hahn-Dupont.

Bernard F. Scanlon, 79, of Sayville, N.Y., would like to see one railroad car set aside for cell phone users to ensure peace and quiet for the rest. Amtrak has taken a stab at that by banning cell phones and other loud devices in one car of some trains, especially on chatty Northeast and West Coast routes.

But if those trains are sold out, the Quiet Car service is suspended and anything goes.

How rude.

Interview: Why Vatican II Emphasized the Lay Apostolate

WASHINGTON, D.C., NOV. 28, 2005 (Zenit.org).- One of the problems in the Church since the Second Vatican Council has been the greater emphasis placed on lay ministries rather than on the lay apostolate.

So says Russell Shaw, a longtime Catholic journalist and former secretary of public affairs of the U.S. bishops' conference.

Shaw, the Washington correspondent for Our Sunday Visitor newspaper and a contributing editor of Crisis and Columbia magazines, is also a consultor of the Pontifical Council for Social Communications.

He shared with ZENIT his thoughts about Vatican II's decree on the apostolate of the laity as it marked its 40th anniversary this month.

Q: What led the Council Fathers to adopt the broadened view of lay apostolate found in the decree on the apostolate of the laity, "Apostolicam Actuositatem"?

Shaw: Two things -- facts and theology.

The facts were: first, that due to secularization and anti-clericalism, priests and religious no longer had effective access to many areas of society in a number of countries, so that, second, if the Church was to be present there, lay people would have to do the job. At the time of the Council, the problem was particularly acute for the "Church of silence" behind the Iron Curtain, but it also was a growing problem in the West.

The theology was the new understanding of the Church as a communion that we find in the dogmatic constitution on the Church, "Lumen Gentium." In place of the top-down pyramid model of the past, the Church is seen as a hierarchically structured reality, with diverse offices and functions, within which nevertheless all of the members have a fundamental equality in dignity and rights. To speak of the Church as "Body of Christ" and "People of God" expresses this insight.

Of central importance among the rights and duties of the Church's members that arise from baptism are the right and duty to participate in the mission of the Church. The generic name for that mission is apostolate. So, the participation of lay people in the mission of the Church is properly called "lay apostolate."

Also enormously important was "Lumen Gentium's" teaching that the laity, just as much as the clergy and religious, are called by God to strive for the highest levels of sanctity -- to be saints. That is stated very clearly in Chapter 5 of the constitution on the Church, while the situation of the laity in relation to the Church and its mission is discussed in Chapter 4.

The decree on the apostolate of the laity therefore is the Council's practical, programmatic application of the principles set out in "Lumen Gentium." The two documents complement each other.

Q: What are the rights and duties of the laity in regard to apostolate that the decree speaks about and how are they reflected in everyday life?

Shaw: Unlike the pre-Vatican II understanding of lay apostolate found in the Catholic Action movement -- the idea, that is, that the apostolate of the laity is a participation in the apostolate of the hierarchy which comes to them by way of hierarchical delegation -- the Council teaches that lay people have a right and duty to engage in apostolate simply because they are members of the Church.

The call to apostolate comes to the laity from Christ and is grounded in baptism and confirmation. It is not something delegated by the hierarchy -- though obviously if lay people wish to act in the name of the Church, they have to have hierarchical approval.

Thus, the Council endorses the idea of autonomous lay apostolate, which it says takes two basic forms: individual apostolate and group apostolate. Whether they participate in a group apostolate or not, all Catholic lay women and men are called to do individual apostolate.

All this is spelled out in the decree on the apostolate of the laity. The basic message is this: "The Christian vocation is, of its nature, a vocation to the apostolate" ["Apostolicam Actuositatem," No. 2].

Ideally, individual lay people put this vision of lay apostolate into practice in their everyday lives by discerning their personal vocations. How is God calling each one of us to serve him, to serve our neighbor, and to carry on the redemptive work of Christ -- which is the mission of the Church -- here and now?

An individual's answer to that, based on vocational discernment, is the specific form that the apostolate should take for him or her. Others can offer general suggestions, point to various good options, but in the final analysis, discerning personal vocations is something individuals must do for themselves.

I think you will find all this covered pretty well in my new book "Catholic Laity in the Mission of the Church," which is published by Requiem Press.

Q: According to the document, the laity are not limited to apostolate in their parish. National and even international apostolate is encouraged. What does this mean for a layperson?

Shaw: The parish is not the primary place where lay apostolate takes place. Nor is some other Church structure or institution the preferred setting for the apostolate of the laity. Lay apostolate is properly directed to, and takes place in, the secular world. As "Apostolicam Actuositatem" puts it, lay people "ought to take on themselves as their distinctive task this renewal of the temporal order" [No. 7].

Our current overemphasis on lay activity within ecclesiastical institutions and structures arises from the overemphasis on lay ministries since the 1970s. The Second Vatican Council said very, very little about lay ministry.

In speaking about the participation of lay people in the Church's mission, it spoke mainly about lay apostolate, and it made it overwhelmingly clear that this is primarily apostolate that carries the Gospel out into the world. Don't misunderstand -- lay ministry is a good thing. But by stressing ministry instead of apostolate, as is now commonly done, we are getting what the Council intended exactly backward.

Q: Given the declining number of priests, especially in the West, how important is "Apostolicam Actuositatem"?

Shaw: The declining number of priests and religious makes it even more important that lay people take up the slack in many ways. But it's important to be clear. If we are talking about forms of ministry -- Eucharistic ministers, lay catechists, things like that -- we are talking about lay ministry, not lay apostolate.

The need for lay apostolate in response to the secularization of society exists independently of a shortage of clerical and religious personnel, and it is growing more urgent all the time.

Q: What is the apostolate of the family that the Council speaks of?

Shaw: The expression can refer to several different things.

One of these is the apostolate "to" families. This consists essentially in efforts to build up and support healthy marriages and families. The need is obvious at a time when half the marriages in the United States end in divorce and pressure for legalization of same-sex marriage is intense -- and in some places has succeeded.

The apostolate "of" the family refers to efforts by couples and families to do family apostolate themselves by helping their neighbors and friends through good example and word. Families also can and should come together for mutual support. Pope John Paul II says a great deal about this, and says it very beautifully, in his apostolic exhortation "Familiaris Consortio."

Q: What is the place of apostolic and spiritual formation, in light of the call to apostolate?

Shaw: Formation for apostolate is absolutely essential, and it can't be separated from spiritual formation. One of the most valuable contributions being made today by the "new" lay groups like Opus Dei, Communion and Liberation, the Neocatechumenate and the rest is their strong emphasis on the in-depth, ongoing formation of the laity.

This is doubly important because, aside from what these groups are doing, almost all the effort in lay formation today is directed to lay ministry. Of course, lay ministers do need to be formed -- and formed very, very well. But people who are serious about apostolate out in the secular world also need solid, continuing formation, and in many cases I'm afraid they aren't getting it. Somehow this doesn't seem to be a big priority in many parishes and Catholic schools.

There is another crucial -- and commonly ignored -- point about the formation of the laity which Pope John Paul makes in his apostolic exhortation "Christifideles Laici." It is that lay formation is, or at least it should be, specifically vocational in nature.

"The fundamental objective of the formation of the lay faithful," he says, "is an ever-clearer discovery of one's vocation and the ever-greater willingness to live it out so as to fulfill one's mission" [No. 58]. The Pope is talking about forming the laity for vocational discernment. The lay groups and movements seem to take that seriously. I wish more people did.

Sunday, November 27, 2005

Father Cantalamessa on Advent's Wake-up Call

ROME, NOV. 27, 2005 (Zenit.org).- In his commentary on today's liturgical readings, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, the preacher of the Pontifical Household, talks about how Advent helps us to kick bad habits.

* * *

Mark 13:33-37

Life Is a Dream!

Jesus' way of speaking implies a very precise view of the world: the present time is like a long night; the life we lead is like a dream; the frenetic activity we engage in is, in fact, a dream. A Spanish writer of the 17th century, Calderón de la Barca, wrote a famous play on the subject: "Life Is a Dream."

In sleep, our life reflects above all brevity. Sleep occurs outside of time. In sleep things do not last as in reality. Situations that would take days and weeks, in sleep happen in a few minutes. It is an image of our life: Reaching old age, one looks back and has the impression that life has been no more than an instant.

Another characteristic of sleep is irreality or vanity. One can dream one is at a banquet and eats and drinks to the point of satiety; one awakes and is again hungry. A poor man, one night, dreams he has become rich: He exults in his sleep, he shows off, he even disdains his own father, pretending he does not recognize him, but he awakens and realizes he is just as poor as he was before! This also happens when one comes out of the dream of this life. One has been rich down here, but then dies and finds himself exactly in the situation of the poor man who awoke after dreaming he was rich. What remains of all his riches if he has not used them well? Empty hands.

There is a characteristic of sleep that does not apply in life, the absence of responsibility. One might have killed or robbed in dreams; one awakes and there is no guilt; one's certificate of criminal antecedents is without a stain. Not so in life; we know it well. What one does in life leaves its trace, and what a trace! It is written in fact that God "will render to every man according to his works" (Romans 2:6).

On the physical plane there are substances that "induce" and aid to sleep; they are called sleeping pills and are well known by a generation such as our own, sick with insomnia. Also on the moral plane there is a terrible sleeping pill. It is called habit.

A habit is like a vampire. The vampire -- at least according to what is believed -- attacks people who are asleep and, while it sucks their blood, at the same time it injects a soporific substance which makes sleep even lovelier, so that the unfortunate individual sinks into ever more profound sleep and the vampire can suck all the blood it needs. The habit of vice also lulls the conscience, so that one no longer feels remorse; one believes one is very well and does not realize that one is dying spiritually.

The only salvation, when this "vampire" has attached itself to an individual, is that something unexpected happen to awaken one from one's dream. This is what the Word of God that we hear so often during Advent is determined to do, cry out so that we wake up!

We conclude with a word of Jesus that opens our hearts to confidence and hope: "Blessed are those servants whom the master finds awake when he comes; truly, I say to you, he will gird himself and have them sit at table , and he will come and serve them" (Luke 12:37).

[Translation by ZENIT]

Saturday, November 26, 2005

Interview: Vittorio Messori and "The Mary Hypothesis"

ROME, NOV. 25, 2005 (Zenit.org).- One of the most popular Catholic writers is back in bookstores with "The Mary Hypothesis," published in Italy by Ares.

Vittorio Messori, author of "The Jesus Hypothesis" (1976), is the first journalist in history to publish a book-length interview with a Pope, the best-selling "Crossing the Threshold of Hope" (1994).

He also published "The Ratzinger Report" (1987), based on an interview with then prefect of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Benedict XVI.

In this interview with ZENIT, Messori discusses the meaning of his most recent work, in which he reflects on the "depth of mystery" that the Virgin Mary represents.

Q: Who is Mary? How can one explain the mystery of a woman chosen by the Creator to give birth to the Son of God?

Messori: Mary is but a humble woman from a humble village. No pre-Christian text speaks of Nazareth, to the point that an attempt was made to demonstrate that no place existed with that name.

For the wisdom of the world, Mary is nothing, but from the perspective of the faith she is the depth of mystery. She is a human person like us, and at the same time the indispensable instrument for the greatest and most unique event -- the incarnation of God himself.

From the Catholic perspective, at present there are in heaven two bodies like ours, glorified for eternity: the one belonging to Jesus and that of his Mother. They anticipate what we too will be.

Q: Why write this book? What is the objective and meaning of this research?

Messori: When, in 1976, I published my first book, "The Jesus Hypothesis," many readers asked me to work on "The Mary Hypothesis."

The matter, then, seemed strange to me, and unacceptable.

My thinking was that Jesus is on the streets, and his Mother is at home. … One knows and loves her only when one attains sufficient closeness with the Son to enter where he dwells.

In any event, there are two challenges that I have tried to address in these more than 500 pages.

First, to show that it is possible to be devoted to Mary without falling into a certain rhetoric. Also, to show that to make room for the Virgin is not the hobby of sentimental or ignorant believers, but a need of every believer which cannot be ignored.

Everything that the Church has said and says about the Mother is, in fact, at the service of Christ, in defense of his humanity and at the same time of his divinity.

Mariology is, in fact, Christology. Her dogmas are but the confirmation and bulwark of her Son's. Whenever Mary has been neglected, sooner or later Christ has also disappeared.

Q: Given the waves of secularization of the last three decades, Marian devotion has preserved many Catholic communities. The latter, by praying the rosary, have kept the faith and tradition. Nevertheless, in some Catholic realms Marian devotion is considered anti-modern and too traditional. What is your opinion in this respect?

Messori: In "The Mary Hypothesis" I write a great deal about apparitions, even though I limit myself to those recognized by the Church.

In the Virgin's apparitions, she continues her vocation of Mother who hastens to her children in difficult moments. Since the beginning of modernity, it is faith itself that is threatened; the flock of believers seems to be in danger of scattering.

The apparitions are a call, a jolt, a confirmation, a strengthening. I go when I can, as a pilgrim, in addition to going as a scholar, to European Marian shrines. I encounter multitudes there that no longer go to their parishes, but that are attracted by those places where the maternal presence has manifested itself.

In the West, the increase in pilgrimages has been the only index of a positive sign in a Church where everything is in decline, from participation in the sacraments to vocations. Marian devotion is at present perhaps the greatest pastoral resource.

And I don't know what to think of certain "intellectual clerics" who reject or even scorn this extraordinary possibility. However, fortunately, average people do not read the "adult" and "critical" theologians, but rather continue to be fascinated before the possibility that a merciful Mother awaits them in a shrine.

Q: Historically, the increase of Christians is also explained thanks to a lofty conception of woman in contrast to the pagan world. To what point does the figure of Mary explain the Christian conception of woman? What could Mary say today to the movement for the emancipation of woman?

Messori: Twenty years ago, after a few days of conversation with the prefect of the former Holy Office, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, I published "The Ratzinger Report." The future Benedict XVI told me that Christians should oppose the crisis of woman, often so painful for her, with an antidote: Mary. In that same person coexists the two great feminine vocations: virginity and maternity.

If properly understood, Marian devotion is not an obstacle, but rather a precious help for women to rediscover a way that truly values the mystery of femininity.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

Wednesday Liturgy: When Eucharistic Prayer IV Can Be Used

ROME, NOV. 22, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

Q: The General Instruction of the Roman Missal, No. 365 d, states: "Eucharistic Prayer IV has an invariable Preface and gives a fuller summary of salvation history. It may be used when a Mass has no Preface of its own and on Sundays in Ordinary Time. Because of its structure, no special formula for the dead may be inserted into this prayer." My question is: What we should understand by a "Mass that has no Preface of its own"? For instance, if I celebrate the votive Mass of St. Joseph, which refers to the Preface of St. Joseph, should I refrain from using Eucharistic Prayer IV? -- J.A., Montreal

A: It is probably easier to answer by saying what is a Mass with a preface of its own (or proper preface) than what is not.

A clarification regarding this point was made by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments to the Italian bishops' conference in an official reply to a doubt in the mid-1970s. This response specified that a proper preface meant preface of the day, not the preface of the season.

Thus, only those Masses are considered to have proper prefaces which are obligatory on a specific day.

In practice this means the Masses of major solemnities which have prescribed prefaces, such as Christmas, Easter, and the Sacred Heart; or one of a specific range of prefaces, such as Sundays of Advent and Lent.

Thus, Eucharistic Prayer IV may be used on Sundays of Ordinary Time. It may also be used for daily Masses during the same period, and may even be used for daily Mass during periods such as Advent and Lent. But it would probably be pastorally better to respect the seasonal preface unless there is a very good reason for using Eucharistic Prayer IV.

Likewise, this Eucharistic Prayer may be used for any votive Mass, even if the rubrics indicate another preface. Since the celebration of the votive Mass is itself an option, the Mass' variable elements are not strictly obligatory.

Thus, for example, the preface of St. Joseph is obligatory on March 19 -- and consequently Eucharistic Prayer IV may not be used on that day. If, however, one celebrates a votive Mass of St. Joseph on any day that such Masses are permissible, one is free to use either the preface of St. Joseph, or another legitimate preface. And so the fourth canon is also usable on such occasions.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Wearing the Cassock

ROME, NOV. 22, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

Following our piece on the use of the cassock (Nov. 8) a Canadian priest kindly reminded me of the Congregation for Clergy's 1994 "Directory on the Ministry and Life of Priests" regarding the obligation of clerical apparel.

This document states in No. 66:

"In a secularized and materialistic society, where the external signs of sacred and supernatural realities tend to disappear, it is particularly important that the community be able to recognize the priest, man of God and dispenser of his mysteries, by his attire as well, which is an unequivocal sign of his dedication and his identity as a public minister. The priest should be identifiable primarily through his conduct, but also by his manner of dressing, which makes visible to all the faithful, indeed and to all men, his identity and his belonging to God and the Church.

"For this reason, the clergy should wear 'suitable ecclesiastical dress, in accordance with the norms established by the Episcopal Conference and the legitimate local custom.' This means that the attire, when it is not the cassock, must be different from the manner in which the laity dress, and conform to the dignity and sacredness of his ministry. The style and color should be established by the Episcopal Conference, always in agreement with the dispositions of the universal law.

"Because of their incoherence with the spirit of this discipline, contrary practices cannot be considered legitimate customs and should be removed by the competent authority.

"Outside of entirely exceptional circumstances, a cleric's failure to use this proper ecclesiastical attire could manifest a weak sense of his identity as one consecrated to God."

Our correspondent then concludes: "The phrase 'when it is not the cassock' has generally been taken to mean, among the faithful priests I know, that the cassock is the norm. Since the Directory was published a decade after the Code of Canon Law, one wonders if the Directory was not intended to be even more specific, since, in some countries including Canada, there had been so much misinterpretation."

I certainly agree with our correspondent that the directory intended to clarify the concise requirements of canon law and especially some of its vaguer and feebler interpretations.

However, I believe that he may be reading too much into the expression "when it is not the cassock," if it is considered as somehow creating a legal requirement to don the cassock.

It is certainly a far cry from the decrees in earlier centuries which inflicted fines, suspensions and even excommunication upon recalcitrant clerics who failed to wear the cassock or some similar ankle length robe.

At the same time, the document certainly confirms the more-than-millennial tradition of the cassock as the universal clerical garb while leaving space for variant episcopal norms and "legitimate local custom" provided that the priest is readily recognizable and distinguished from the laity.

They thus involve the totality of external manner of dress and not just the sporting of some religious symbol such as a medal or cross which, alas, have been sometimes reduced to mere fashion items.

Outdoors, the cassock has generally been used less in the English-speaking world than in mainland Europe.

For example, a decree of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore (1884) says: "We wish therefore and enjoin that all keep the law of the Church, and that when at home or when engaged in the sanctuary they should always wear the cassock ['vestis talaris'] which is proper to the clergy. When they go abroad for duty or relaxation, or when upon a journey, they may use a shorter dress, but still one that is black in colour, and which reaches to the knees, so as to distinguish it from lay costume. We enjoin upon our priests as a matter of strict precept, that both at home and abroad, and whether they are residing in their own diocese or outside of it, they should wear the Roman collar."

Even this norm regarding the length of the outer garment was relaxed by the popular use of bicycles among the clergy in spite of some restrictions such as those upheld by the Second Synod of Maynooth, in Ireland, in 1900.

Regarding the origin of the custom of the white papal cassock, a priest from Indianapolis writes:

"You state that the use of the papal white cassock originated with Pius V's use of his Dominican habit. I have heard this story repeated many times, and I suspect it is repeated so often because it's kind of a cute story. I suspect the story is apocryphal.

"Raphael's painting The Mass at Bolsena (1512) portrays Julius II in what appears to be pretty much the same white cassock and red mozzetta worn by popes today, as does his seated portrait of Julius II, and his Portrait of Leo X with Cardinals Luigi de' Rosso and Giulio de' Medici (1518-19). Piombo's 1526 portrait of Clement VII, and Titian's 1546 portrait of Paul III also portray these popes in white cassock and red mozzetta."

I confess that I repeated the story based on the authority and knowledge of respected professors, but our reader's observations led me to review the resources available to me.

While it is true that St. Pius V maintained his Dominican habit after election (see L. Pastor's "History of the Popes," Volume 8) this is but one hypothesis and the actual origin of the use of the white cassock is uncertain.

Among the other interpretations given by G. Moroni, in an ecclesiastical encyclopedia published in Venice in 1859, is that of an ancient Pontifical Diary which relates that the white color is linked to the sublime office of pope and is thus symbolized, besides the change of name, by the assumption of the white cassock.

Another theory hails back to a legend of a dove which posed on Pope St. Fabian's head after his election in 238. And Moroni also refers to a tradition that the bishops of Jerusalem, from the time of St. James, were accustomed to use white robes to distinguish themselves from other ministers of the Church. It was therefore appropriate that the supreme head of the universal Church should also don that color.

Whatever the truth may be, St. Pius V was certainly the first Pope to publish a centralized and universal legislation regarding clerical costume in 1589, in which he imposed the wearing of the cassock on all clerics, even those in minor orders.

Finally, some readers have asked if deacons may also wear the Roman collar.

It is common that most seminarians wear the Roman collar, or clerical shirt, after ordination to deacon or even from the beginning of theology (as is the norm in the Diocese of Rome). But it does not seem to be customary for permanent deacons, especially married deacons, to wear it even though they are members of the clergy in the proper sense. Perhaps this is because the use of the collar is usually associated with the celibate state.

There might be prudential reasons for avoiding this practice too. For example, a permanent deacon is usually a mature man who could easily be taken for a priest and asked for confession, or be mistaken for a Protestant minister if he is out with his wife and family.

Since these are prudential, not theological, reasons, they might not apply everywhere. The bishops may provide norms adapted to the particular situations in each country.

The deacon may wear the cassock and surplice when carrying out the liturgical ministries in which the alb is not obligatory, such as baptisms and weddings without Mass.

Sunday, November 20, 2005

Focused Link: The Sin Box

A editorial on why Catholics go to Confession less often and why Catholics should go more often.

The full article:
http://www.slate.com/id/2130589/?nav=tap3

*~*~*~*~*

A Catholic friend of mine recently went to confession at her parish church for the first time in years. She had personal reasons for wanting to seek absolution, but there was this, too: She said she'd long felt a little sorry for the priests sitting alone in their confessional boxes, waiting for sinners to arrive.

Focused Link: Is Christian Morality Negative?

A question-and-answer approach on certain aspects of Christian life and morals.

The full article:
http://catholiceducation.org/articles/sexuality/se0123.html

Focused Link: Good? Bad? or None of the Above?

It is an odd mark of our time that the first question people ask about character education is whether public schools should be doing it at all. The question is odd because it invites us to imagine that schooling, which occupies about a third of a child's waking time, somehow could be arranged to play no role in the formation of a child's character.

The full article:
http://catholiceducation.org/articles/education/ed0274.html

Focused Link: A Cardinal Virtue

A simple article on how a cardinal gets to exercise a myriad of virtues in a simple situation. An excerpt of the article is posted below.

The full link:
http://catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0819.html

*~*~*~*~*

The dormitory in this instance was really an expertly converted barn over which St. Barnabas had been asked to preside. A weary Mary and Joseph, who could find no room in the inn, at least gained easy entrance to their barn.

What I did, in the absence of a doorbell, was rattle the outside door for a few minutes until a figure appeared on the second floor, slowly descended to my level, and unlocked the door that had been our final barrier to a good night's rest. "I'm sorry the door was locked," he said. Judging from his attire and his tired look, I thought I surely must have wakened him, and duly apologized. He politely brushed the matter aside. Then I asked him, in the most respectful tone I could muster under the circumstances, "Are you Peter Cardinal Turkson?" He nodded meekly. We shook hands and he asked if he could help me with my baggage.

Father Cantalamessa on Judgment Day

VATICAN CITY, NOV. 18, 2005 (Zenit.org).- In his commentary on the liturgical readings on the feast of Christ the King, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, the preacher of the Pontifical Household, reflects on the day of judgment.

* * *

We have reached the last Sunday of the liturgical year, in which we celebrate the feast of Christ the King. The Gospel presents to us the last act of history: the universal judgment.

What a difference there is between this scene and that of Christ before his judges in his passion! Then, all were seated and he standing in chains; now all are standing, and he is seated on the throne. Men and history judge Christ: on that day, Christ will judge men and history. Before him is decided who remains standing and who falls. This is the immutable faith of the Church which in her creed proclaims: "He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead," and "his kingdom will have no end."

Today's Gospel also tells us how the judgment will take place: "I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink." What will happen, therefore, to those who not only did not give food to those who were hungry, but also took food away from them; not only did not welcome the stranger, but were the cause of his becoming a stranger.

This does not just affect some criminals. It is possible that a general atmosphere of impunity is established, in which there are competitions to break the law, to corrupt or allow oneself to be corrupted, with the justification that everyone does it. However, the law was never abolished. Suddenly, the day comes when an investigation gets underway and a disaster happens, as the one that took place in Italy with [the] "Clean Hands" [anti-corruption campaign].

But, is not this, in a certain sense, the situation in which we all live, those investigated and the investigators, before the law of God? One after the other, the commandments are calmly broken, including the one that states "Thou shall not kill" (to say nothing of the one that says "Thou shall not commit adultery") with the pretext that everyone does it, that culture, progress and even human law, now allow it. But God has never thought of abolishing the commandments or the Gospel, and this general feeling of security is no more than a fatal deception.

Some years ago, Michelangelo's fresco of the universal judgment was restored. But there is another universal judgment that must be restored: It is not painted on brick walls, but on the hearts of Christians. It has become totally discolored and is being turned into ruins.

"The beyond and, with it, the judgment has become a joke, something so uncertain that one is amused to think that there was a time in which this idea transformed the whole of human existence," said Soren Kierkegaard. There are those who might wish to console themselves, saying that, after all, the day of judgment is very far off, perhaps millions of years away. But, from the Gospel, Jesus responds: "Fool! This night your soul is required of you" (Luke 12:20).

The topic of the judgment is interlaced in the liturgy of today with that of Jesus the good shepherd. The responsorial psalm says: "The Lord is my shepherd, there is nothing I shall want, fresh and green are the pastures where he gives me repose" (Psalm 22:1-2). The meaning is clear: Now Christ reveals himself to us as the good shepherd; one day he will be obliged to be our judge. Now is the time of mercy, then it will be the time of justice. It is for us to choose, while we still have time.

[Italian original published in Famiglia Cristiana; translation by ZENIT]

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Wednesday Liturgy: Funeral Masses for a Suicide

ROME, NOV. 15, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

Q: What is the current stand of the Church regarding the possibility of funeral Masses "in corpore presente" of persons who are said to have committed suicide? Is it true that there already are mitigating circumstances, like the possibility of irrationality at the moment of taking one's life (even if there was no note), whereby it would be possible to suppose that the person was not in his right mind, and that therefore it is licit to let the funeral entourage to enter a church and a funeral Mass be said? -- E.C.M., Manila, Philippines

A: In earlier times a person who committed suicide would often be denied funeral rites and even burial in a Church cemetery. However, some consideration has always been taken into account of the person's mental state at the time.

In one famous case, when Rudolph, the heir to the throne of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, committed suicide in 1889, the medical bulletin declared evidence of "mental aberrations" so that Pope Leo XIII would grant a religious funeral and burial in the imperial crypt. Other similar concessions were probably quietly made in less sonorous cases.

Canon law no longer specifically mentions suicide as an impediment to funeral rites or religious sepulture.

Canon 1184 mentions only three cases: a notorious apostate, heretic or schismatic; those who requested cremation for motives contrary to the Christian faith; and manifest sinners to whom a Church funeral cannot be granted without causing public scandal to the faithful. These restrictions apply only if there has been no sign of repentance before death.

The local bishop weighs any doubtful cases and in practice a prudent priest should always consult with the bishop before denying a funeral Mass.

A particular case of suicide might enter into the third case -- that of a manifest and unrepentant sinner -- especially if the suicide follows another grave crime such as murder.

In most cases, however, the progress made in the study of the underlying causes of self-destruction shows that the vast majority are consequences of an accumulation of psychological factors that impede making a free and deliberative act of the will.

Thus the general tendency is to see this extreme gesture as almost always resulting from the effects of an imbalanced mental state and, as a consequence, it is no longer forbidden to hold a funeral rite for a person who has committed this gesture although each case must still be studied on its merits.

Finally, it makes little difference, from the viewpoint of liturgical law, whether the body is present or not. If someone is denied a Church funeral, this applies to all public ceremonies although it does not impede the celebration of private Masses for the soul of the deceased.

The same principle applies to funeral Masses of those whose body is unavailable for burial due to loss or destruction. Certainly the rites are different when the body is present or absent, but the Church's public intercession for the deceased is equally manifest in both cases.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Confession for RCIA Candidates

ROME, NOV. 15, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

In the Nov. 1 column on confession for Protestant candidates who were about to enter the Catholic Church, I mentioned that "Eastern Christians were treated differently."

A Minneapolis reader asked: "What is this 'very different position' of the Eastern Christians? Should they or should they not receive the sacrament of penance before they are publicly received into the Catholic Church?"

Eastern Christians share the same sacramental practice and faith as Catholics, even though they are not in full communion.

Because of this, the Catholic Church permits them to receive the sacraments of reconciliation, Eucharist and anointing of the sick for any just cause when one of their own priests is unavailable. Likewise, a Catholic may receive these sacraments from an Eastern Christian for a similar cause.

For example, Catholics who work or vacation in a predominately Orthodox country where a Catholic Mass is unavailable, may freely attend and receive Communion at an Orthodox Divine Liturgy although they would not be obliged to do so.

The Church asks Catholics in such situations to respect the requirements of the local Church regarding such things as fasting before Communion.

It is important to note that not all Eastern Churches have the same law as the Catholic Church on this matter. Some do not allow their faithful to receive the sacraments in other Churches, nor do they offer this possibility to others. Once more, we need to be attentive to different sensibilities.

A priest writing from Hong Kong asked: "What about for those Protestant denominations whose baptism is doubtful (because of the form, etc.), and the candidate receives conditional baptism? Should they also go to confession before the conditional baptism?"

If conditional baptism is foreseen, the confession should be postponed until a suitable time after the celebration, since certainty is required in questions regarding the validity of the sacraments.

Of course, confession is not necessary immediately after baptism, as this latter sacrament removes all sins. In the case of a conditional baptism, however, it probably does much good to the spiritual health of the new Catholic to avail of the opportunity of confession as soon as possible.

Finally, a reader from Ontario asked about marriage: "I just read your response to the question about the validity of the sacrament of penance for a baptized non-Catholic person before being received into the Church. Now this has made me wonder about the validity of my marriage as a sacrament. I went through the RCIA program and was baptized. Since I was civilly married to a Catholic, I was required to get married in the Church before my baptism. My question is: Since I was not baptized at the time of the marriage ceremony, is my marriage a sacramental marriage?"

Here the question is rather complex, but I will try to put it into a nutshell.

As our reader was only civilly married to a Catholic, her husband was in an irregular situation with respect to the Church, which does not recognize the validity of such marriages.

Her subsequent marriage to him would have been made with a dispensation, which transformed her relationship into a valid, but not yet sacramental, spousal bond.

The moment she received baptism, her valid marriage was elevated to a sacramental union by the very grace of her new state as a member of Christ's Mystical Body.

This is in conformity with long-standing practice in the Church. For example, when spouses joined in a valid natural marriage are baptized together, they are not usually required to go through another marriage ceremony, as their natural marriage is elevated to a sacramental bond by the very fact of receiving baptism.

Sunday, November 13, 2005

In Praise of Woman: Meditation by Father Cantalamessa

VATICAN CITY, NOV. 11, 2005 (Zenit.org).- In his commentary on this Sunday's liturgical readings, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, the preacher of the Pontifical Household, offers a reflection on the dignity of woman.

* * *

For once, instead of concentrating on the Gospel (the parable of the talents), we will meditate on the first reading, taken from Proverbs, which speaks of the grandeur and dignity of woman.

The eulogy, though very beautiful, has a defect that is not grounded in the Bible, but rather in the age and culture it reflects. It reflects a masculine view: Blessed is the man who has a wife who makes his clothes, who honors his home, who enables him to walk with his head held high. Today, women would not be enthusiastic with this praise.

To know the authentic and definitive biblical thought on woman one must look at Jesus. He was not, as one would say today, a "feminist"; he never made an explicit analysis or criticism of the institutions and relations between classes and sexes. In his mission, the difference between man and woman has no weight. Both are images of God, both need redemption. But for this reason precisely he is able to unmask the deformations that have led to subjecting woman to man. Jesus is free before woman: He does not see her as a snare or a threat, and this allows him to break many prejudices.

Jesus does not refuse to speak with women, to teach them, to make them his disciples. Risen, he shows himself first of all to a group of women, who then become his first witnesses. From his lips there is never a word of contempt or irony for woman, something that was rather commonplace in the culture of the age, penetrated by misogyny. The salvation of woman is as important for Jesus as that of man. That is why many of his miracles affected women.

I am moved by one in particular: the healing of a woman who for 18 years "was bent over and could not fully straighten herself" (cf. Luke 13:10). Jesus called her and said: "Woman, you are free from your infirmity." Immediately she was made straight and praised God.

That woman, whom Jesus called and to whom he said, "you are free!" who now can raise her head, look at people in the face, see the sky, glorify God and feel like a person again, is a powerful symbol. She is not just one woman; she represents the feminine condition. She is every woman who does not walk bent over, not because of an illness, but because of the oppression to which she has been subjected to in almost all cultures. What freedom and what hope is contained in this cry of Jesus!

One of the positive events of our age is the emancipation of women, their equality of rights. In the apostolic letter on the dignity of woman ("Mulieris Dignitatem"), John Paul II underlined the contribution the Church wants to make to this sign of the times.

Woman (like man) has a powerful ally in this journey of authentic liberation -- the Holy Spirit. He himself "bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God" (Romans 8:16) gives us the real meaning of our dignity and freedom.

In Hebrew, the name of the Holy Spirit, "Ruah," is feminine. But, without stressing this fact too much, it is true that there is a certain affinity, a conniving, and a partnership between the Holy Spirit and woman. He is called the paraclete, which means consoler, and "spirit of life," which "warms what is cold, heals what is sick." And who better than woman shares, at the human level, these prerogatives?

It is said that the daughter of a king of France treated her young maid very harshly. One day, irritated, she said to her: "Don't you know I am the daughter of your king?" The young girl replied calmly: "And, don't you know that I am the daughter of your God?"

[Italian original published in Famiglia Cristiana; translation by ZENIT]

Saturday, November 12, 2005

Focused Link: Rethinking the Social Responsibility of Business

An old debate on the objective of business.

The full article:
http://www.reason.com/0510/fe.mf.rethinking.shtml

Focused Link: Do Catholics Believe in Purgatory?

An article discussing the correct notion of purgatory.

The full article
http://catholiceducation.org/articles/religion/re0818.html

Focused Link: Our Mission in Life Is to Love and Serve

Here's an article by Susan Conroy detailing her experiences in the Missionaries of Charity, a religious group founded by Blessed Teresa of Calcutta.

The full article:
http://catholiceducation.org/articles/catholic_stories/cs0139.html

Wednesday, November 09, 2005

Wednesday Liturgy: Wearing the Cassock

ROME, NOV. 8, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

Q: I know of priests who wear their cassock on Sunday but do not wear it in public. Why is this? Are there guidelines that priests have to wear a cassock in church but not outside? -- J.G., Stone Mountain, Georgia

A: The use of a cassock (or soutane), an ankle-length garment, worn by clerics and choristers, remains common in some parts of the world while in others it has almost disappeared or, as our reader points out, is reserved for liturgical functions.

A priest's cassock is usually black although white is sometimes used in tropical climates. Bishops and some other honorific prelates wear a purple cassock. A cardinal's cassock is red. These colored cassocks are usually reserved for liturgical functions, however, and both bishops and cardinals typically don a black cassock with colored buttons, trimmings and sash indicating the wearer's hierarchical status.

The Pope's cassock is white, a custom that arose after St. Pius V (1504-1572), a member of the Order of Preachers, continued to wear his Dominican habit even after his elevation to the papacy in 1566.

According to canon law (Canon 284) clergy are required to don some form of worthy ecclesiastical dress according to the norms of the bishops' conference and legitimate local customs.

Thus, while there is ample scope for different forms of clerical garb, a priest should be readily identifiable by his external presentation, unless some grave external circumstances, such as the legal prohibition of clerical dress, makes the ecclesiastical law impossible to practice.

In the United States, the official norms ask that priests generally use the black clerical suit and collar although nothing prevents the use of the cassock. All the same, the custom of largely reserving the cassock for "in house" use within the church, rectory or seminary is fairly long-standing in the United States and predates the Second Vatican Council.

In Poland, and some other Central European countries, the sight of a priest in cassock is still quite common, occasionally even while engaged in leading youth groups and pilgrimages.

In the Vatican, the use varies. Many priests prefer to use the clerical suit for daily chores and reserve the cassock for formal meetings; others retain the habitual use of the cassock.

In fact, until April, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger could be observed almost daily as he walked across St. Peter's Square from home to office and back again, dressed in a simple black cassock.

Within the liturgy, the cassock may be used along with a surplice (a white large-sleeved loose-fitting garment worn over the cassock and reaching almost to the knees, usually made of linen or cotton and sometimes decorated with lace) in carrying out most rites in which an alb is not prescribed. This would include, for example, the celebration of baptisms, Benediction, and weddings outside of Mass.

However, the expanded role attributed to the alb as a universal liturgical vesture has diminished the use of the cassock and surplice both for priests and for others such as acolytes who often used it to serve Mass.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Proper Posture After Communion

ROME, NOV. 8, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

In the wake of our comments on postures after Communion (Oct. 25) several readers inquired about a custom in several places.

One Michigan reader writes: "My diocese has adopted some disturbing practices during Holy Mass. The entire congregation has been ordered to stand from the Great Amen until every communicant has received and returned to their seat. Please comment."

There are two points to consider. One is to have the congregation stand from the end of the Eucharistic Prayer until Communion. The second is to have the entire congregation stand until all have received Communion.

With respect to the first point, standing after the Agnus Dei is the most common posture in the universal Church. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal states, however, that where the practice of knelling at this moment is customary, such as in the United States, it is praiseworthily retained.

Because of this, the official U.S. translation of GIRM No. 43 retained the practice but gave some scope to the local bishop. To wit:

"In the dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason. Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects after the consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise."

Since, in accordance with the final sentence of the above norm, the diocesan bishop has determined to have the faithful stand after the Agnus Dei, this becomes the norm for that diocese.

The second point, of having everybody remain standing until all have received Communion, was already treated in a Feb. 17, 2004, column, and I substantially repeat what I then wrote:

"GIRM, No. 43, caused some controversy. It affirms that the faithful 'may sit or kneel while the period of sacred silence after Communion is observed.'

"Some liturgists, and even some bishops, interpreted this text to mean that nobody should kneel or sit until everybody had received Communion. The resulting debate led Cardinal Francis George, president of the U.S. bishops' Liturgy Committee (BCL), to request an authentic interpretation from the Holy See on May 26, 2003.

"Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, responded to the question on June 5, 2003 (Prot. N. 855/03/L):

"'Responsum: "Negative, et ad mentem" [No, for this reason]. The mens [reasoning] is that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on the one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.'

"Having received this response, the BCL Newsletter commented: 'In the implementation of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, therefore, posture should not be regulated so rigidly as to forbid individual communicants from kneeling or sitting when returning from having received Holy Communion' (p. 26)."

All the same, no matter what posture they adopt, the faithful may still be encouraged to begin their thanksgiving by participating in the Communion hymn, especially if a period of silence for personal prayer is duly observed after the distribution of Communion.

Finally, a religious mentioned a particular point regarding genuflections:

"Your response for Oct. 25 includes that some people habitually genuflect when 'passing the center of the Church.' In our convent if we are passing through the west cloister and the chapel doors are open, we do this. But it is not because of habit. As I understand it, when the tabernacle used to be in the center of the sanctuary, behind the altar, we would be thus reverencing Our Lord in the Sacrament, while passing by."

My response referred only to the case of not genuflecting to the tabernacle immediately after receiving Communion during Mass.

At all other times, genuflection is the proper and appropriate gesture of respect and adoration to be made whenever passing in front of the tabernacle, at least in the context of Western culture.

Some Asian cultures substitute a deep bow which in their context has the same sense of adoration and veneration as the genuflection in the West.

Sunday, November 06, 2005

"Where Are We Going?" Asks Father Cantalamessa

ROME, NOV. 4, 2005 (Zenit.org).- In his commentary on this Sunday's liturgical readings, Capuchin Father Raniero Cantalamessa, the preacher of the Pontifical Household, discusses the parable of the 10 virgins.

* * *

When commenting on the parable of the 10 virgins, we do not want to emphasize so much what differentiates the young maidens (five are wise, and five are foolish), as what unites them: All are going out to meet the bridegroom.

This allows us to reflect on a fundamental aspect of Christian life -- its eschatological orientation, that is, the expectation of the Lord's return and our encounter with him. It helps us to respond to the eternal and disturbing question: Who are we and where are we going?

Scripture says that in this life we are "foreign pilgrims," we are "parishioners," as "paroikos" is the word of the New Testament that is translated as pilgrim and exile (cf. 1 Peter 2:11), and "paroikia" (parish) is the translation of pilgrimage or exile (cf. 1 Peter 1:17).

The meaning is clear. In Greek, "para" is an adverb and it means next. "Oikia" is a subject and it means house. Therefore, it means to live next to, or near, not inside, but beside. For this reason, the term indicates someone who lives in a place for a time, the passer-by, or the exile; "paroikia" indicates, therefore, a provisional house.

The life of Christians is a life of pilgrimage and exile. Christians are "in" the world, but not "of" the world (cf. John 17:11,16). Their true homeland is in heaven, and they await Jesus Christ the savior to come (cf. Philippians 3:20). They do not have a stable dwelling, but are on the way to their future one (cf. Hebrews 13:14). The whole Church is no more than a great "parish."

The second-century letter to Diogenes defines Christians as men who "inhabit their own homelands, but as foreigners; they participate in everything as citizens, but endure everything as foreigners; every foreign land is their homeland, and every homeland is foreign to them." It is, however, a special way of being "foreign."

Some thinkers of the age also defined man as a "foreigner in the world by nature." But the difference is enormous: The latter considered the world as the work of evil, and because of this, they did not recommend commitment to it as expressed in marriage, in work, in the state. There is nothing of all this in the Christian. Christians, the letter says, "marry as everyone and beget children," "they take part in everything."

Their way of being "foreign" is eschatological, not ontological. Namely, the Christian feels himself a foreigner by vocation, not by nature, in as much as he is destined to another world, and not in so far as he proceeds from another world. The Christian sentiment of acknowledging oneself foreign is founded on the resurrection of Christ: "If then you have been raised with Christ, seek the things that are above" (Colossians 3:1). That is why he does not reject creation in its fundamental goodness.

In recent times, the rediscovery of the role and commitment of Christians in the world has contributed to attenuate the eschatological meaning, to the point that there is almost no talk of the last things: death, judgment, hell and paradise. But when the expectation of the Lord's return is genuinely biblical, it does not distract from the commitment to brothers; rather, it purifies it.

It teaches to "judge with wisdom the goods of the earth, orienting ourselves always toward the goods of heaven." St. Paul, after reminding Christians that "the time is short," concluded saying: "So then, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all men, and especially to those who are of the household of faith" (Galatians 6:10).

To live awaiting the Lord's return does not even mean to want to die soon. "To seek the things that are above" means, rather, to orient one's life in view of the encounter with the Lord, to make this event the pole of attraction, the beacon of life. The "when" is secondary, and must be left to the will of God.

[Italian original published in Famiglia Cristiana; translation by ZENIT]

Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Wednesday Liturgy: Confession for RCIA Candidates

ROME, NOV. 1, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

Q: Recently I received a baptized Christian into the Catholic Church during a Mass in which the person received holy Communion. The RCIA ritual encourages the candidate to go to confession before the Mass and Communion, and this was done. However, since the confession was made before the candidate was actually in the Catholic Church, how could it have been a valid Catholic sacrament? Or does the absolution take effect only when the person is received into the Church? I cannot fit this event into my traditional understanding of Catholic sacraments. -- D.J., Buffalo, New York

A: We briefly addressed this question in a follow-up on April 27, 2004, in which we said:

"A catechist from Michigan asked if candidates in the RCIA may receive the sacrament of penance before they have been formally initiated into the Church.

"In this case we are dealing with Christians validly baptized but who have not yet made their solemn entrance into the Catholic Church nor received the sacraments of confirmation and Eucharist.

"This case is already foreseen in the appendix to the Introduction to the Rite for the Christian Initiation of Adults.

"Norm No. 9 stipulates that if the candidate is to admitted to the Catholic Church during Mass (the usual practice), then beforehand, the candidate, having considered his personal condition, confesses his past sins after having informed the priest of his proximate admission.

"Any priest with faculties for hearing confessions may receive this confession.

"Thus, not only may the future Catholic make his confession before being formally received but in general he or she should do so."

Thus there is no question regarding the canonical legitimacy of the practice described. Yet, this does not answer the theological difficulties experienced by our reader.

Perhaps an answer could be found by making a distinction between impediments to the valid reception of a sacrament stemming from divine law and those stemming from Church law.

From the point of view of divine law, baptism is absolutely necessary before receiving any other sacrament. Once baptism has been received, however, the person has at least the root possibility of receiving some of the other sacraments even though other impediments might exist.

A person baptized as a Protestant (Eastern Christians are in a very different position) is usually impeded from receiving the sacraments of confirmation, Eucharist, penance, anointing and holy orders due to their lack of communion with the Catholic Church.

The Church usually recognizes the sacramental quality of any valid marriage between a baptized man and woman.

Since most of the impediments to valid reception of these sacraments by non-Catholic Christians are rooted in Church law, not divine law, the Church itself may decide under what conditions a person not within her fold may receive the comfort of some of her sacraments and thus lift the impediment to invalidity.

Such conditions are set out, for example, in the Ecumenical Directory, and usually require grave conditions such as danger of death, the spontaneous request of the person desiring the sacrament, and faith in the Catholic understanding of the sacrament by the person requesting it.

In the case of the person who is about to be received into full communion, the Church creates, so to speak, an automatic exception which makes the sacrament of reconciliation both valid and licit for the person involved.

Although this answer may be a trifle speculative, I hope it is sufficient to clear up the difficulties.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Concluding the Prayer of the Faithful

ROME, NOV. 1, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.

Readers sought some clarifications regarding aspects of the Prayer of the Faithful (see Oct. 18).

Before responding, I would point out that, although this form of prayer has very ancient roots, its present form is fairly novel in liturgical practice and thus there are no traditional norms regarding its practice.

As a consequence, several slightly diverse customs have arisen and it is not easy to say if one is necessarily more correct than another.

Apart from the norms quoted in the previous column we could say that a rule of thumb is that they be guided by common sense and that the petitions should be clear and brief, couched in general terms, and should not be multiplied beyond measure.

Some readers asked if it were permissible for the faithful to be invited to formulate spontaneous petitions from the pews.

While there is no rule forbidding this, I think it is a practice best reserved for smaller groups who have the necessary experience to formulate appropriate petitions. Such groups could be those who regularly attend daily Mass, religious communities, and prayer groups.

It is probably wisely avoided at a parish Sunday Mass, since the number of petitions could easily become inflated or their content turn out to be excessively personal, verbally garbled or political. They could even create annoyance if the same people tend to dominate the "spontaneous" petitions week after week.

Some other readers asked about the practice of reciting the Hail Mary during the Prayer of the Faithful.

While this custom is not universal, it seems to have its roots in English liturgical practice from even before the Second Vatican Council. One reader suggested that a document exists impeding this practice, but I have been unable to find it. I would say that, barring some authoritative intervention, the practice could continue where it has been customary to do so.

The objections to the use of the Hail Mary are usually based on the principle that liturgical prayers are practically always directed to the Father, and on rare occasions to the Son.

However, when the Hail Mary is used in the Prayer of the Faithful she is not addressed directly but is usually invoked as a mediator to carry our prayer to the Father within the context of the communion of saints.

This invocation is certainly unnecessary from a liturgical standpoint, and it is probably better not to introduce it where it does not exist. However, I do not believe it needs to be forbidden where already well established.

Finally an Irish priest asked if the celebrant could reserve a particular petition, such as for the soul for whom Mass is celebrated, to himself rather than to the deacon or reader. I would say that this may be done for good pastoral reasons, just as the priest may also add a particular intention which he believes should be kept in mind at that moment.