Benedict XVI's Address to Filipino Bishops: "A Unified and Positive Voice Needs to Be Presented to the Public"

VATICAN CITY, NOV. 29, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Here is the address Benedict XVI delivered today upon receiving in audience a group of bishops from the Philippines at the end of their five-yearly "ad limina" visit.


* * *

Dear Brother Bishops,

I am pleased to extend to all of you a warm welcome on the occasion of your visit ad limina Apostolorum. I thank Cardinal Gaudencio Rosales for the kind words that he has addressed to me on your behalf, and I assure you of my prayers and good wishes for yourselves and for all the faithful entrusted to your pastoral care. Your presence here in Rome strengthens the bonds of communion between the Catholic community in the Philippines and the See of Peter, a communion which stretches back over four centuries to the first offering of the Eucharistic Sacrifice upon your shores. As this communion of faith and sacrament has nourished your people for many generations, I pray that it may continue to serve as a leaven in the broader culture, so that current and future generations of Filipinos will continue to encounter the joyful message of the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.

To be such a leaven, the Church must always seek to find her proper voice, because it is by proclamation that the Gospel brings about its life-changing fruits (cf. Mk 16:15-16). This voice expresses itself in the moral and spiritual witness of the lives of believers. It also expresses itself in the public witness offered by the Bishops, as the Church's primary teachers, and by all who have a role in teaching the faith to others. Thanks to the Gospel's clear presentation of the truth about God and man, generations of zealous Filipino clergymen, religious and laity have promoted an ever more just social order. At times, this task of proclamation touches upon issues relevant to the political sphere. This is not surprising, since the political community and the Church, while rightly distinct, are nevertheless both at the service of the integral development of every human being and of society as a whole. For her part, the Church contributes most toward the building of a just and charitable social order when, "by preaching the truths of the Gospel, and bringing to bear on all fields of human endeavour the light of her doctrine and of a Christian witness, she respects and fosters the political freedom and responsibility of citizens" (Gaudium et Spes, 76).

At the same time, the Church's prophetic office demands that she be free "to preach the faith, to teach her social doctrine ... and also to pass moral judgments in those matters which regard public order whenever the fundamental human rights of a person or the salvation of souls requires it" (ibid.). In the light of this prophetic task, I commend the Church in the Philippines for seeking to play its part in support of human life from conception until natural death, and in defence of the integrity of marriage and the family. In these areas you are promoting truths about the human person and about society which arise not only from divine revelation but also from the natural law, an order which is accessible to human reason and thus provides a basis for dialogue and deeper discernment on the part of all people of good will. I also note with appreciation the Church's work to abolish the death penalty in your country.

A specific area in which the Church must always find her proper voice comes in the field of social communications and the media. The task set before the whole Catholic community is to convey a hope-filled vision of faith and virtue so that Filipinos may find encouragement and guidance on their path to a full life in Christ. A unified and positive voice needs to be presented to the public in forms of media both old and new, so that the Gospel message may have an ever more powerful impact on the people of the nation. It is important that the Catholic laity proficient in social communications take their proper place in proposing the Christian message in a convincing and attractive way. If the Gospel of Christ is to be a leaven in Filipino society, then the entire Catholic community must be attentive to the force of the truth proclaimed with love.

A third aspect of the Church's mission of proclaiming the life-giving word of God is in her commitment to economic and social concerns, in particular with respect to the poorest and the weakest in society. At the Second Plenary Council of the Philippines, the Church in your nation took a special interest in devoting herself more fully to care for the poor. It is heartening to see that this undertaking has borne fruit, with Catholic charitable institutions actively engaged throughout the country. Many of your fellow citizens, however, remain without employment, adequate education or basic services, and so your prophetic statements and your charitable action on behalf of the poor continue to be greatly appreciated. In addition to this effort, you are rightly concerned that there be an on-going commitment to the struggle against corruption, since the growth of a just and sustainable economy will only come about when there is a clear and consistent application of the rule of law throughout the land.

Dear Brother Bishops, as my predecessor Pope John Paul II rightly noted, "You are Pastors of a people in love with Mary" (14 January 1995). May her willingness to bear the Word who is Jesus Christ into the world be for you a continuing inspiration in your apostolic ministry. To all of you, and to the priests, religious and lay faithful of your dioceses, I cordially impart my Apostolic Blessing as a pledge of peace and joy.

© Copyright 2010 -- Libreria Editrice Vaticana

Wednesday Liturgy: Eastern-Rite Children and Holy Communion

ROME, NOV. 23, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q: A family of Eastern-rite Catholics recently moved into the area and are attending the Roman Catholic parish here as there are no parishes of their rite available. Their child received first Communion as an infant and continued to receive Communion regularly. Now they are attending of necessity a Latin-rite Mass. Should the child abstain now from receiving Communion until she reaches the age of discretion? -- M.C., Louisiana

A: I think we need to distinguish between pertaining to an Eastern rite or Church and assisting at a Mass of a different rite.

Canon 112 §2 of the Code of Canon Law is quite clear: "The practice, however prolonged, of receiving the sacraments according to the rite of another ritual Church sui iuris does not entail enrollment in that Church."

Canon 383 §2 also places responsibility for the pastoral care of Eastern Catholics in the hands of the local bishop: "If he has faithful of a different rite in his diocese, he is to provide for their spiritual needs either through priests or parishes of the same rite or through an episcopal vicar."

The situations foreseen in this canon are those of small groups of Eastern faithful unable to attend their own rite.

This corresponds to the right of the faithful presented in Canon 214 "to worship God according to the prescripts of their own rite approved by the legitimate pastors of the Church."

When the number of Eastern faithful merits it, the exercise of this right is guaranteed by the establishment of an exarchate for each particular rite. In some cases the exarch exercises pastoral jurisdiction over wide swaths of the country. For example, the increase in immigrants to the United States from the Indian Malankar Church led to the establishment of the Apostolic Exarchate of United States of America, Faithful of the Oriental Rite (Malankarese) last July.

Based on the canonical principles mentioned above, especially Canon 214, I would say that there is no reason why the child cannot continue to receive Communion in accordance with the practice of her own rite.

If doing so occasions pastoral difficulties, such as incomprehension on the part of children preparing for first Communion, then a pastoral solution could be found that takes these difficulties into account without depriving the Eastern child of a means of grace that she has partaken of since baptism and confirmation.

That this is the approved practice in the United States is confirmed by the 2001 letter of an American bishop to an Eastern-rite parent in a similar situation:

"God's blessing to you. This letter is in response to your e-mail which followed our conversation regarding your children not being allowed to receive communion at []. I apologize for the delay. I appreciate that this is a matter of serious concern to you and your family. Eastern Catholics in communion with the Catholic Church have the right to receive communion in our Church and are to be welcomed to the Eucharist in all the parishes in the Diocese.

"In his Decree on the Catholic Churches of the Eastern Rite, Pope Paul VI, on November 21, 1964, says: 3. These individual Churches, whether of the East or the West, although they differ somewhat among themselves in rite, that is, in liturgy, ecclesiastical discipline, and spiritual heritage, are nevertheless, each as much as the others, entrusted to the pastoral government of the Roman Pontiff, the divinely appointed successor of St. Peter in primacy over the universal Church. They are consequently of equal dignity, so that none of them is superior to the others as regards to rite and they enjoy the same rights and are under the same obligations, also in respect of preaching the Gospel to the whole world (cf. Mark 16,15) under the guidance of the Roman Pontiff.

"In his 1995 apostolic letter, Orientate Lumen, The Light of the East, Pope John Paul II wrote, 'A particular thought goes out to the lands of the Diaspora where many faithful of the Eastern Churches who have left their countries of origin are living in a mainly Latin environment.' The Pope continued, 'I particularly urge the Latin Ordinaries in these countries to study attentively, grasp thoroughly and apply faithfully the principles issued by this Holy See concerning ecumenical cooperation and the pastoral care of the faithful of the Eastern Catholic Churches, especially when they lack their own hierarchy.' As Bishop of the Diocese [], I understand that in this big diocese it is not always possible for the faithful to attend their own church on Sundays though this is considered first choice. When Eastern Catholic families like yours celebrate the Sunday obligation in one of our Latin Catholic Parishes they are welcome to the Eucharistic table.

"The Committee on the Relationship between Eastern and Latin Catholic Churches of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, in their work Eastern Catholics in the United States of America, in 1999, explains that in the USA, 'It is the normal practice of the Church that Catholics celebrate the Lord's day by participating in the celebration of the Eucharist in a community of their own church. Nevertheless, where there is diversity of Churches in the one place, the faithful worthily celebrate the resurrection of Jesus by attending the Eucharist in any of the autonomous ritual Churches."

"Holy Communion may be received in any Catholic Church. Since sacramental initiation in the mystery of salvation is perfected in the reception of the Divine Eucharist, children of Eastern Catholic Churches who have not received the Eucharist at the time of their Christian initiation, should receive their first Holy Communion in their own autonomous Church.

"May God bless you for your continued commitment to Our Lord Jesus Christ and our Christian faith. Thank you for sharing with me your concern in this matter."

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Gregorian Masses; Multiple Intentions

ROME, NOV. 23, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


In relation to Mass intentions (see Nov. 9) an Indonesian reader asked whether the system of stipends unfairly favors priests who minister in wealthy parishes. "Is it just their 'fortune' that some priests in the poor parishes gain nothing while in the big cities some priests could get money easily? They are ordained priests by the same sacrament, but unfortunately some priests' daily Masses are not 'paid for' while the other priests in the big cities get abundant Mass stipends."

As a general rule the sum offered as a Mass stipend belongs to the priest, who may use it for his personal expenses. Depending on their particular rules religious priests may either retain their stipends or hand it over to their community.

As mentioned before, a priest may only keep one stipend a day even if he celebrates more than one Mass or one with multiple intentions. The recommended donation for a Mass stipend is deliberately set quite low, and there is no danger of a priest becoming rich on the basis of stipends. In most countries a week's stipends would barely cover the cost of filling up the gasoline tank of a car.

At the same time, given the difference in purchasing power in various countries, offering excess Mass intentions to missionary priests has sometimes been a means of supporting evangelization.

Article: Habits for a Happy Marriage

RICHARD FITZGIBBONS, M.D.

In my 34 years of working with Catholic couples, I have observed seven major conflicts that create severe marital stress. The good news is that these weaknesses can be overcome.

The sacrament of marriage is a fulfilling and challenging vocation that requires cheerful, self-giving love and sacrifice. An understanding of this call to self-giving, its support from the Lord's love, the weaknesses that can interfere with marital love, and their resolution is vital for the health of Catholic marriages.

Before he became pope, John Paul II wrote a book titled Love and Responsibility, in which he presented the importance of self-gift in marital friendship and betrothed love. He said in this kind of love – which includes, but is more than, sexual intimacy – the spouse surrenders him or herself to the other so that one no longer thinks primarily of "me" but of "we."

This oneness and flow of love between a husband and wife are in some ways called to model the love and openness within the heart of God, the Trinity. John Paul II later wrote, "God is revealed in the communion between man and woman, for this communion images the love that God himself is" (Letter to Women, 7).

Unfortunately, too few Catholic couples are aware of the weaknesses that harm their personalities and of the habits, virtues and graces that can assist in their healing. Marital self-giving and happiness can be limited by a number of emotional or character weaknesses that enter the marriage or develop during years of married life.

In my 34 years of working with Catholic couples, I have observed seven major conflicts that create severe marital stress: excessive anger, selfishness, controlling behaviors, emotionally distant behaviors, anxiety/mistrust, weaknesses in confidence, and sadness/loneliness. The good news is that these weaknesses can be overcome through growth in self-knowledge, virtues and grace.

Forgiveness for Excessive Anger

Excessive anger is one of the major sources of marital and family stress. Couples benefit from knowing that they have basically three options for dealing with anger: denial, expression and forgiveness. Forgiveness is the most effective for diminishing marital anger.

An immediate forgiveness exercise can be used whenever one feels overly angry. Here, a person thinks repeatedly, "Understand and forgive, understand and forgive." This exercise usually diminishes feelings of anger, and only then should one begin to discuss the hurt or disappointment that caused the anger initially.

Likewise, past forgiveness exercises are important to resolve anger from previous hurts in the marriage or in the family background. Here, the spouse might imagine oneself as a child thinking, "I want to understand and forgive the parent who hurt me the most." This forgiveness is essential for marital happiness because most couples bring into their adult life unresolved anger that, under stress, can be misdirected at each other.

Every time a spouse forgives, a certain amount of anger is removed from his or her heart. The virtue of patience is also essential in this process, as it is required to gain mastery over the passion of anger.

Generosity for selfishness

Selfishness harms marriages severely because it turns a spouse inward and interferes with cheerful self-giving. The selfish spouse thinks "me" not "we" and regularly overreacts in anger. Selfishness is the major cause of separation and divorce, and many popes have written that selfishness is the major enemy of marital love.

Unfortunately, we live in a culture in which selfishness is epidemic. The use of contraception further intensifies the negative attributes of self-centeredness and mistrust and should be avoided for the good of the marriage.

Instead, a commitment to grow daily in generosity, humility, chastity and temperance is helpful in diminishing this personality conflict. The sacrament of reconciliation is also helpful in resolving selfishness and excessive anger.

Respect for controlling behaviors

Controlling behaviors harm marriages in numerous ways. They can cause one's spouse to feel sad, angry, insecure, anxious, exhausted and discouraged. These behaviors can be caused by modeling a controlling parent, selfishness and pride, or compensation for strong feelings of insecurity.

The controlling spouse needs to understand how he or she is harming the marriage and family. Prayer, respect and a greater love for the goodness in one's spouse are helpful in putting an end to the repetition of a controlling weakness. The "victim" spouse can also work to correct this behavior by communicating regularly that the Lord is in control.

Cheerful self-giving for emotionally distant behaviors

One of the most common complaints that I hear in marital therapy is that a spouse is emotionally distant, most often the husband. This weakness can be the result of hurt feelings in the marriage or in previous relationships. However, the major conflict that we typically uncover is a parent who was not affectionate or complimentary. Current neuroscience suggests that such modeling begins in early childhood and is difficult to overcome without a strong commitment to do so.

Healing occurs by making a commitment to repeat a parent's good qualities but not his or her emotionally distant behaviors. Forgiveness of the parent and a daily decision to show more vulnerability and compassion can help to break this control from the past, and a commitment to making five positive comments for each negative comment can strengthen marital friendship.

The regular reception of the Eucharist and meditation upon the Lord's loving heart are also very helpful.

Trust for anxiety

Every time a spouse forgives, a certain amount of anger is removed from his or her heart.

Excessive anxiety can result in significant stress and sadness in married life. Unhealthy anxiety, as with other emotional conflicts, can pull a spouse away from his or her marriage and family. This can be the result of a number of factors, including a weakness in trust, strong insecurities, financial worries or weaknesses in faith.

In a conference for priests many years ago, an archbishop stated that he believed the major source of emotional stress in the priests of that archdiocese was the feeling of being overly responsible. His advice was that one should work hard in fulfilling God's will but take mini-breaks to give back to the Lord all of one's responsibilities and worries. This unburdening process is very effective in diminishing anxiety.

Anxiety in marriage can diminish by setting aside time daily to talk, preferably after dinner for a half hour while the kids do chores or their homework. Setting aside time for date nights and fighting against materialism by growth in the virtue of temperance are also important.

Gratitude for weaknesses in confidence

Weaknesses in confidence are major causes of irritability, a tendency to be critical and conflicts with pornography. Women are more fortunate than men in that the majority of them have experienced more affirmation and affection from their mothers than men have from their fathers.

Confidence can be fostered by being grateful for one's God-given gifts, by forgiving those who have damaged confidence, by receiving fraternal support from groups such as the Knights of Columbus, and by being thankful for one's work and trusting the Lord with it.

Hope and love for sadness

All of the conflicts presented thus far can result in marital unhappiness and loneliness. A commitment to grow in self-knowledge and to develop virtues can protect spouses from unhappiness. A common source of sadness is the failure to rely upon God's love in a culture that is increasingly driven to exclude God.

For those spouses with unresolved loneliness with a parent, the Catholic faith can be enormously helpful with its teaching that one always has Our Lady as another loving mother, St. Joseph as another loving father and the Lord as one's best friend. Working with a spiritual director in these areas has resolved sadness in many spouses.

Healthy Catholic marriages and families are dependent upon spouses working to maintain healthy personalities. This can occur through a daily commitment to overcome weaknesses by growth in good habits, virtues and graces that can strengthen romantic love, the marital friendship, and the openness and oneness that is meant to image God.

---

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Richard Fitzgibbons, M.D. "Habits for a Happy Marriage." Columbia Magazine (November, 2010): 17-19.

Reprinted with permission of the author. Read this issue of Columbia online here.

To find out more about the Knights of Columbus and why all Catholic men should join the Knights, go here.

THE AUTHOR

Richard Fitzgibbons, is the director of the Institute for Marital Healing in West Conshohocken, Pa. He teaches at the John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family in Washington, D.C., and is a consultant to the Congregation for the Clergy at the Vatican. He is the co-author with Robert Enright, of Helping Clients Forgive: An Empirical Guide: An Empirical Guide for Resolving Anger and Restoring Hope, 2000, American Psychological Association Books. He co-chaired the task force of the Catholic Medical Association that produced the document, "Homosexuality and Hope." His website is maritalhealing.com.

Copyright © 2010 Columbia Magazine

Wednesday Liturgy: When 2 Deacons Are Present

ROME, NOV. 16, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q: At a Mass where there are two deacons and one of the deacons is going to be preaching the homily, which deacon should proclaim the Gospel? Should the deacon who is going to be preaching proclaim the Gospel, or should one deacon proclaim the Gospel and the other preach the homily? In a similar situation, who proclaims the Gospel when a bishop is the main celebrant and a concelebrating priest is going to preach the homily, but there is more than one priest concelebrating and there is no deacon? Does one priest proclaim the Gospel and another preach, or does the priest who is preaching proclaim the Gospel? -- R.B., Marquette, Michigan

A: The norms on this point are not absolute and allow for a certain degree of flexibility in order to adapt to special circumstances. At the same time, there are some aspects of liturgical decorum that should be respected as far as possible.

One principle that should be respected is that if a deacon is present, it is he who reads the Gospel. A priest should proclaim only if the deacon is impaired for some exceptional reason, for example, if he did not know the language of the Gospel in a multilingual celebration.

All things being equal, when there are two deacons they are usually divided as the deacon of the Word and the deacon of the Eucharist. Apart from proclaiming the Gospel and the general intercessions, the deacon of the Word takes his place to the celebrant's left during the Liturgy of the Eucharist or may also incense the Blessed Sacrament during the Eucharistic Prayer. The deacon of the Eucharist takes care of the habitual diaconal functions during the preparation of gifts, the Eucharistic Prayer and the sign of peace.

Another general principle in liturgy is to avoid useless movements.

In this light a deacon who is to preach should usually take the role of the deacon of the Word so as to carry out both functions with ease and without interruptions.

There may occasionally be good reasons for a change in minister. For example, if the Gospel is to be sung, then the deacon better qualified for this task may proclaim the sacred text, even though another will preach.

In the case of concelebration without a deacon, the principal celebrant, bishop or priest should not read the Gospel even though he would normally be the one to preach the homily.

If a priest other than the principal celebrant is to preach, then in general he should also read the Gospel. The fact that several priests may be concelebrating is not enough reason to divide up the tasks between several ministers and thus multiplying unnecessary movements.

Exceptions to this general rule of thumb may be made for reasons similar to those mentioned for deacons: difference of language, singing the text, etc.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Extraordinary Form; Book of Blessings

ROME, NOV. 16, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


After our reply on the extraordinary form and the Book of Blessings (see Nov. 2), some readers asked for further clarifications.

An Alabama reader asked: "Can a permanent deacon impart blessing on people or articles as the priest or bishop does by making the sign of the cross over them? Can he also bless water apart from baptismal water?"

A deacon, whether permanent or transitory, may carry out all those blessings not specifically reserved to a bishop or priest in the Book of Blessings. The rites open to the deacon include most blessings of people, devotional objects and also holy water.

Although the deacon may impart these blessings, he should usually defer to a priest if one is present and available. Likewise, blessings during Mass are always done by the priest.

A Mississippi reader made a request regarding Summorum Pontificum: "The extraordinary form of the Mass is celebrated weekly at a church in New Orleans. When Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament follows Mass, the priestly blessing and the last Gospel are eliminated from the Mass. Is this procedure correct?"

While I am no expert on all the intricacies of the extraordinary form, classical liturgical guides such as Fortescue-O'Connell-Reid in English and Trimelloni in Italian both describe the exposition of the Blessed Sacrament after Mass or before a procession as following the Fourth Gospel. Trimelloni states that even in those rare cases when Mass was allowed before the Blessed Sacrament exposed, the priest blessed the people as usual and not with the Blessed Sacrament (No. 437, A4).

It would appear therefore that the practice in this parish is incorrect with respect to the rubrics of the extraordinary form.

Article: Liturgical Formation for the People of God

By Father Mauro Gagliardi


ROME, NOV. 12, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Last month, the Vatican published Benedict XVI's letter to seminarians for the conclusion of the Year for Priests, in which the Pope reminds those seeking the priesthood that "anyone who wishes to become a priest must be first and foremost a 'man of God.'"

Specifically, the Pontiff continued, this means that "the priest is not the leader of a sort of association whose membership he tries to maintain and expand. He is God's messenger to his people. He wants to lead them to God and in this way to foster authentic communion between all men and women. That is why it is so important, dear friends, that you learn to live in constant intimacy with God" (No. 1).

In Benedict XVI's teaching, prayer is the privileged "place" to learn the Christian style of life. For example, in the encyclical "Spe Salvi," the Holy Father presented prayer as one of the principal "places" of learning and of exercising Christian hope (cf. Nos. 32-34). In the letter to seminarians, the Pontiff considers it the particular way in which the candidate to the priesthood learns to be in profound and continual communion with the Lord.

The Pope writes: "When the Lord tells us to 'pray constantly,' he is obviously not asking us to recite endless prayers, but urging us never to lose our inner closeness to God. Praying means growing in this intimacy. So it is important that our day should begin and end with prayer; that we listen to God as the Scriptures are read; that we share with him our desires and our hopes, our joys and our troubles, our failures and our thanks for all his blessings, and thus keep him ever before us as the point of reference for our lives" (No.1).

Furthermore, Benedict XVI reminds future priests that prayer in the perfect state is the public worship of the Church, namely, the sacred liturgy, and in a privileged way the Holy Mass.

He writes: "The proper celebration of the Eucharist involves knowing, understanding and loving the Church's liturgy in its concrete form. In the liturgy we pray with the faithful of every age -- the past, the present and the future are joined in one great chorus of prayer. As I can state from personal experience, it is inspiring to learn how it all developed, what a great experience of faith is reflected in the structure of the Mass, and how it has been shaped by the prayer of many generations" (No.2).

The liturgy is truly understood only by being inserted in the living Tradition of the Church, from which we receive it as a gift to keep and live out in a spirit of faith and prayer. This is, in fact, the only correct spirit with which to celebrate and participate in the liturgy. It is not about producing superficial and passing emotions, through particular inventions to be inserted in the rite, because the true "spirit of the liturgy" is the spirit of adoring prayer, of the one who is to "stand in [his] presence and serve [him]" (cf. Roman Missal [Paul VI], "Eucharistic Prayer II").

It is exciting -- says the Holy Father based on his personal experience -- to learn to understand the liturgy with this ecclesial and dynamic sense of the true Tradition. For this reason, liturgical formation is necessary, which illuminates the darkness of ignorance and pulls down the bastions of ideology, helping to understand the sacred meaning of divine worship and its link with the whole history of the faith, which the Church guards and professes in her children: head and members, shepherds and flock.

Liturgical formation is not, however, -- and cannot be -- a renewed form of "gnostic" initiation, a learning reserved to a few. Liturgical formation, though founded on the seriousness of a scientific study that is not for everyone, must be translated in ways accessible to the faithful to whom it is addressed.

Among the many initiatives at the universal and local level geared toward the liturgical formation of the People of God is this biweekly series "Spirit of the Liturgy."

Having received various requests, we have decided to experiment this year with a piece that is more accessible, as will be noted by the greater brevity of the articles and of the further reduction of the number of references and notes. This choice sacrifices, on one hand, the just desire of the columnists to furnish more details and references on the topics treated; but, on the other, we hope that it can favor a wider diffusion of our reflections, so as to be able to reach a larger number of readers.

To them goes hence the gratitude of the authors of the "Spirit of the Liturgy," for the fidelity and care with which they followed the preceding installments, and with which we trust they will want to continue reading them.

[Translation by ZENIT]

* * *

Father Mauro Gagliardi is a consultor of the Office for the Liturgical Celebrations of the Supreme Pontiff and professor of theology at the Pontifical Athenaeum Regina Apostolorum of Rome.

Article: Repentance and renewal in the mission of catechesis

ARCHBISHOP CHARLES J. CHAPUT, O.F.M. CAP.

The practical unbelief we now face in our societies is, in large measure, the fruit of our own flawed choices in teaching, parenting, religious practice and personal witness. But these choices can be unmade.

Some of you may know the short story, "The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson. If you don't, I need to spoil the ending to make my point. But I promise the story will still be worth reading.

"The Lottery" is set on a summer day in a small town in 1940s America. The people are assembling for a very old annual ritual. The ritual has something to do with imploring a good corn harvest – but there's no mention of any God, and no clergy anywhere in the picture.

Each person in the village lines up to draw a slip of paper from an old wooden box. Tessie Hutchinson, a young wife and mother, draws a slip with a black mark.

From that moment, the story moves quickly to its conclusion. The lottery official gives the word, and the villagers move in on Tessie. And they stone her to death.

"The Lottery" is one of the most widely read stories ever published in my country. And for good reason. It's well told. The ending leaves you breathless. Teachers like it because it provokes sharp classroom discussions.

Or at least it used to.

A few years ago, a college writing professor, Kay Haugaard, wrote an essay about her experiences teaching "The Lottery" over a period of about two decades.

She said that in the early 1970s, students who read the story voiced shock and indignation. The tale led to vivid conversations on big topics – the meaning of sacrifice and tradition; the dangers of group-think and blind allegiance to leaders; the demands of conscience and the consequences of cowardice.

Sometime in the mid-1990s, however, reactions began to change.

Haugaard described one classroom discussion that – to me – was more disturbing than the story itself. The students had nothing to say except that the story bored them. So Haugaard asked them what they thought about the villagers ritually sacrificing one of their own for the sake of the harvest.

One student, speaking in quite rational tones, argued that many cultures have traditions of human sacrifice. Another said that the stoning might have been part of "a religion of long standing," and therefore acceptable and understandable.

An older student who worked as a nurse, also weighed in. She said that her hospital had made her take training in multicultural sensitivity. The lesson she learned was this: "If it's a part of a person's culture, we are taught not to judge."[1]

I thought of Haugaard's experience with "The Lottery" as I got ready for this brief talk. Here's where my thinking led me:

Our culture is doing catechesis every day. It works like water dripping on a stone, eroding people's moral and religious sensibilities, and leaving a hole where their convictions used to be.

Haugaard's experience teaches us that it took less than a generation for this catechesis to produce a group of young adults who were unable to take a moral stand against the ritual murder of a young woman. Not because they were cowards. But because they lost their moral vocabulary.

Haugaard's students seemingly grew up in a culture shaped by practical atheism and moral relativism. In other words, they grew up in an environment that teaches, in many different ways, that God is irrelevant, and that good and evil, right and wrong, truth and falsehood can't exist in any absolute sense.

This is the culture we live in, and the catechesis is on-going. But I don't think this new kind of barbarism – because that's what it is; a form of barbarism – is an inevitable process.

It's not easy to de-moralize and strip a society of its religious sense. Accomplishing the task requires two key factors: First, it takes the aggressive, organized efforts of individuals and groups committed to undermining faith and historic Christian values. Second, it takes the indifference of persons like you and me, Christian believers.

I want to focus on the second factor, because it involves us.

Christians in my country and yours – and throughout the West, generally – have done a terrible job of transmitting our faith to our own children and to the culture at large.

Evidence can be found anecdotally in stories like Kay Haugaard's. We can also see it in polls showing that religious identity and affiliation are softening. More people are claiming that they're "spiritual," but they have no religion.

Religion is fading as a formative influence in developed countries. Religious faith is declining in Western culture, especially among Canadian and American young people. This suggests that the Church is actually much smaller than her official numbers would indicate. And this, in turn, has implications for the future of Catholic life and the direction of our societies.

What's happening today in the Church is not a "new" story. We find it repeated throughout the Old Testament. It took very little time for the Hebrews to start worshipping a golden calf. Whenever the people of God grew too prosperous or comfortable, they forgot where they came from. They forgot their God, because they no longer thought it was important to teach about him.

Because they failed to catechize, they failed to inoculate themselves against the idolatries in their surrounding cultures. And eventually, they began praying to the same alien gods as the pagans among whom they lived.

We have the same struggles today. Instead of changing the culture around us, we Christians have allowed ourselves to be changed by the culture. We've compromised too cheaply. We've hungered after assimilating and fitting in. And in the process, we've been bleached out and absorbed by the culture we were sent to make holy.

If our people no longer know their faith, or its obligations of discipleship, or its call to mission – then we leaders, clergy, parents and teachers have no one to blame but ourselves. We need to confess that, and we need to fix it. For too many of us, Christianity is not a filial relationship with the living God, but a habit and an inheritance. We've become tepid in our beliefs and naive about the world. We've lost our evangelical zeal. And we've failed in passing on our faith to the next generation.

The practical unbelief we now face in our societies is, in large measure, the fruit of our own flawed choices in teaching, parenting, religious practice and personal witness. But these choices can be unmade. We can repent. We can renew what our vanity and indifference have diminished. It's still possible to "redeem the time," as St. Paul once put it.[2] But we don't have a lot of time. Nor should we make alibis for mistakes of the past.

Sixty years ago, when Shirley Jackson wrote "The Lottery," she could count on her readers knowing what right and wrong were. She lived in a culture that reflected a broadly Christian consensus about virtue and moral integrity. That's no longer the case.

The culture we live in today proselytizes for a very different consensus – one based on political and moral agendas vigorously hostile to Christian beliefs.

For too many of us, Christianity is not a filial relationship with the living God, but a habit and an inheritance. We've become tepid in our beliefs and naive about the world. We've lost our evangelical zeal. And we've failed in passing on our faith to the next generation.

A recent article in the New York Times went directly to this point. It was about a new ad campaign launched by supporters of homosexual "marriage" in New York. The campaign features politicians and Hollywood celebrities making a series of reasonable-sounding arguments.

One example is from the actress, Julianne Moore. Her ad begins, "Hi, I'm Julianne Moore, and I'm a New Yorker. We all deserve the right to marry the person we love."[3]

The New York campaign is misleading and ultimately ruinous to real marriages and families. But when Christians don't understand the content or the reasons for their own faith, they have no compelling alternative to offer.

The points I've been making are these:

First, either we form our culture, or the culture will form us. Second, right now, the culture does a better job of shaping us than we do in shaping the culture. And third, we need to admit our failures, and we need to turn ourselves onto a path of repentance and change, and unselfish witness to others.

The central issue in renewing Catholic catechesis has little to do with techniques, or theories, or programs, or resources. The central issue is whether we ourselves really do believe. Catechesis is not a profession. It's a dimension of discipleship. If we're Christians, we're each of us called to be teachers and missionaries.

But we can't share what we don't have. If we're embarrassed about Church teachings, or if we disagree with them, or if we've decided that they're just too hard to live by, or too hard to explain, then we've already defeated ourselves.

We need to really believe what we claim to believe. We need to stop calling ourselves "Catholic" if we don't stand with the Church in her teachings – all of them. But if we really are Catholic, or at least if we want to be, then we need to act like it with obedience and zeal and a fire for Jesus Christ in our hearts. God gave us the faith in order to share it. This takes courage. It takes a deliberate dismantling of our own vanity. When we do that, the Church is strong. When we don't, she grows weak. It's that simple.

In a culture of confusion, the Church is our only reliable guide. So let's preach and teach our Catholic beliefs with passion. And let's ask God to make us brave enough and humble enough to follow our faith to its radical conclusions.

Thanks for your attention. God bless you.

Endnotes:

1. Jackson's story and Haugaard's essay can be found in Os Guinness, ed., Unriddling Our Times: Reflections on the Gathering Cultural Crisis (Baker, 1999), 123-141.
   
2. Eph. 5:16.
   
3. Michael Barbaro, "New Ads to Try to Build Public Support for Gay Marriage," New York Times (Sept. 13, 2010).

---

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap. "Repentance and renewal in the mission of catechesis." Diocese of Victoria, B.C. (October 15, 2010).

Archbishop Charles J. Chaput delivered these remarks on October 15, 2010 at a catechetical conference sponsored by the Diocese of Victoria, British Columbia.

Reprinted by permission of The Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.

THE AUTHOR

The Most Reverend Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap., has been the archbishop of Denver, Colorado since February 18, 1997. As member of the Prairie Band Potawatomi Tribe, Archbishop Chaput is the second Native American to be ordained bishop in the United States, and the first Native American archbishop. He is the author most recently of Render Unto Caesar: Serving the Nation by Living our Catholic Beliefs in Political Life, and Living the Catholic Faith: Rediscovering the Basics.

Copyright © 2010 Charles J. Chaput, O.F.M. Cap.

Article: Aiming High: How to Grow in Virtue

EDWARD P. SRI

If we are aiming to live virtuously in our marriages, families, and friendships, we need much more than sporadic good deeds or occasional acts of kindness when we happen to be in a good mood.

I was nervous about pulling the trigger. I had never used a shotgun before, but my friend took me shooting skeet – clay discs that are thrown into the air as moving targets. My friend, who was a good marksman, shot the first several rounds and then asked if I wanted to try. Bang! On my very first shot, I knocked it down.

Someone watching me at that moment might have been very impressed. "Wow, he hit it on the first try! He must be a lot better than that first guy!" However, one good shot does not make a good marksman. A good marksman possesses the ability to use a shotgun well and hit his target consistently and easily. I, on the other hand, barely knew what I was doing. My next 25 shots made that evident: They were all embarrassing misses, widely off the mark.

If we are aiming to live virtuously in our marriages, families, and friendships, we need much more than sporadic good deeds or occasional acts of kindness when we happen to be in a good mood. In this reflection, we will consider three key characteristics of virtue that are crucial for living our relationships on target, the way God intended for us. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, the virtuous man does what is good consistently, easily, and joyfully.

Three Characteristics of Virtue

1. Consistency. First, the Catechism defines virtue as "an habitual and firm disposition to do the good" (no. 1803). This tells us that virtue requires much more than performing good deeds every once in a while. After all, it is easy to be generous, patient, and kind to others when things are going well in our life: when we're feeling good and enjoying the people we're with. But will we be generous, patient, and kind to the person who happens to be frustrating us right now? Will we be virtuous with our spouse when we're tired? Will we be virtuous with our children when we're experiencing stress at work or feeling overwhelmed in life? The virtuous man is someone you can count on to give the best of himself consistently, no matter what the circumstances may be.
   
   
2. Ease. Virtue also enables a man to perform good acts easily (Catechism, no. 1804). He does what is good promptly, as if it is second nature for him. Just as a professional basketball player drives to the basket and sinks a lay-up without having to think much about it, so too the virtuous man performs good acts easily without extraordinary effort, deliberation, or internal struggle. Doing what is good is so deeply ingrained in him that his virtuous deeds seem automatic. On the other hand, to the extent that a man struggles in being cheerful, humble, or pure, for example, to that extent he is lacking in virtue.
   
   
3. Joy. Finally, the virtuous man does not just do what is right. He does it joyfully (Catechism, no. 1804). He takes delight in the good, even if it is difficult to achieve or causes him suffering. The virtuous man does not complain or feel sorry for himself when he does what is right. He finds a deeper joy in living the way God made him to live, which is to do the good no matter what the cost.
   

Teeing Off

A helpful exercise is to consider your most important relationships and ask yourself, "Which vices are keeping me from loving these people more?"

Let us consider an analogy from sports. A professional golfer such as Jack Nicklaus possessed a high degree of skill that made him an excellent golfer. He knew which club to use, had a great swing, and had good judgment about how to hit the ball. Therefore, he could hit the ball straight down the fairway with ease. He also hit the ball consistently right where he wanted it, and he found joy in playing the game well.

I, on the other hand, am not a good golfer. I rarely play, and when I do, it is abundantly clear that I do not possess the skills of golfing. It is not easy for me to golf well. Even if I do occasionally hit the ball where I want it, I am far from consistent in doing so. And since I am so poor at this sport, there usually is not much joy when I play!

Personal Virtue Assessment

With this background, we are now prepared to ask ourselves, "To what degree am I really living the virtues?"

For example, do I have the virtue of generosity? The man who puts a$1,000 check into the collection basket one Sunday may be performing a good and noble act, but that alone would not necessarily mean he possesses the virtue of generosity. Some people can give money to a charitable organization, but fail to give personal time, attention, and care to the people right in their own lives. The truly generous man, however, gives of himself – not just when it is convenient for him, but consistently. He also gives promptly, easily, and joyfully, without having to calculate the cost or wrestle with his selfishness. For a generous man, giving of himself is second nature to him.

Similarly, do I have the virtue of patience? The patient mother, for example, can remain calm with her children not only when they are behaving well and the day is moving along smoothly, but even when the kids are having a breakdown and the schedule for the day has been turned completely upside down. Though she may experience stress and sorrow over the way things are going (which would be quite natural!), she does not allow that sadness to take over. Her patience enables her to maintain a certain interior peace and carry out her responsibilities as a mother well, despite the chaos around her.

The standards of virtue are high. The more we learn about the virtues, the more we realize how far off the mark we are. But this should not discourage us. The Church offers much wisdom on practical ways we can grow in virtue, increasing the capacity within us to do the good with consistency, ease, and joy.

How to Grow in Virtue

First, we must examine our lives and discern the main weaknesses keeping us from living our relationships with excellence. These weaknesses are called vices – the bad habits formed through repeated sin.

A helpful exercise is to consider your most important relationships and ask yourself, "Which vices are keeping me from loving these people more?" Are you selfish with your spouse, tending to think more about yourself than serving his or her needs? Do you lose your patience often with your children? Are you "too busy" to give God your time in prayer each day?

The best way to conquer vice in our lives is not merely to try to avoid sin, but to try to put into practice the particular virtue that opposes the vice we're trying to conquer. For example, if I often say critical things about other people, I should make it a point to honor others each day. If I tend to procrastinate, I should start certain projects at work earlier than necessary in order to combat my procrastination.

If I tend to be self-centered and want to have my own way in my home, I should purposely find out what my spouse's and children's needs and preferences are and pursue those instead of my own. By positively practicing the virtues that oppose my vices, I can begin to overcome the weaknesses that prevent me from giving the best of myself in my relationships.

Practice Makes Perfect?

Given our fallen human nature, we will always struggle with an inclination toward sin. This is why we need to reach out to a power outside of us that can enable us to live the virtues in a way we could never do on our own.

Such a program of virtue training, however, will not be easy. As the Catechism explains, "The removal of the ingrained disposition to sin . . . requires much effort and self-denial, until the contrary virtue is acquired." Therefore, we should not be discouraged if we do not notice immediate results. Growing in virtue is like strengthening our bodies' muscles. When an out-of-shape 40-year-old man first starts jogging, he probably will not find running three miles a day to be easy. In the beginning, it will be quite painful. But over time, the jogger who consistently runs several times a week builds up his muscles and stamina. With much practice, a three-mile run eventually becomes a lot easier.

Similarly, strengthening our moral muscles – the virtues – takes time and effort. We might experience tremendous difficulty and failure when we first start battling against our vices. The unchaste man will struggle against impurity for a long time. But if he perseveres in the struggle, chaste living eventually will get easier for him as his moral muscles strengthen. The man who suddenly decides to start praying every day most likely is not going to find it easy to do. But if he practices daily prayer for many weeks and months, prayer will gradually become more natural for him.

The key here is perseverance. If the beginning jogger quits after two weeks because it is too difficult, he will never be able to make a three-mile run easily. Similarly, if we give up the battle for virtue because it is too hard, we will only remain enslaved in our vices and never be able to give the best of ourselves to our God, spouse, children, and friends.

Amazing Grace

Nevertheless, no matter how much we pursue virtue, we will still run up against our own limitations. Most of us have weaknesses that have plagued us for many years, no matter how hard we have tried to overcome them. Given our fallen human nature, we will always struggle with an inclination toward sin. This is why we need to reach out to a power outside of us that can enable us to live the virtues in a way we could never do on our own. That power is found in Jesus Christ. As the Catechism explains, "Christ's gift of salvation offers us the grace necessary to persevere in the pursuit of the virtues"(no. 1811).

Sanctifying grace is Christ's divine life in us, transforming our selfish hearts with the supernatural love of Christ Himself. The more we grow in Christ's grace, the more we are able to love supernaturally – above and beyond what our weak human nature could ever do on its own.

This is why it is essential to seek grace in prayer and the sacraments. With Christ's divine life dwelling in us, our natural virtues are elevated to participate in Christ's life. With grace, we can begin to be patient with Christ's patience. We can begin to be humble with Christ's humility. And we can begin to love with Christ's divine love working through us. When grace starts to transform our lives, we can begin to say with St. Paul that "it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me"(Gal. 2:20).

The Art of Living by Edward P. Sri

Virtue and "The Art of Living" Aiming High: How to Grow in Virtue The First Step of Prudence Agony, Anxiety, and Decisiveness Patience and Perseverance Called to Greatness: The Virtue of Magnanimity Vainglory: Seeking the Praise of Men Temperance and the Art of Eating Anger and Virtue

---

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Edward P. Sri. "Aiming High: How to Grow in Virtue." Lay Witness (Mar/Apr, 2009): 11.

This article is reprinted with permission from Lay Witness magazine.

Lay Witness is a publication of Catholic United for the Faith, Inc., an international lay apostolate founded in 1968 to support, defend, and advance the efforts of the teaching Church.

THE AUTHOR

Edward Sri is provost and a professor of theology and Scripture at the Augustine Institute in Denver, Colorado (www.augustineinstitute.org) and a frequent contributor to Lay Witness. He resides with his wife, Elizabeth, and their five children in Littleton, Colorado. Edward Sri is the author of Queen Mother, Mystery of the Kingdom, and The New Rosary in Scripture: Biblical Insights for Praying the 20 Mysteries. His books are available by calling Benedictus Books toll-free at (800) 398-5470.

Copyright © 2009 LayWitness

Wednesday Liturgy: Gregorian Masses; Multiple Intentions

ROME, NOV. 9, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q1: I belong to a religious community. We are all priests in the house where I live, and all have some kind of outside ministry. One priest works in a parish, another as campus minister and another as chaplain at a nursing home. Sometimes Mass is offered in our chapel but most of the time outside. My question is: Can we say Gregorian Masses? I asked the provincial and he said yes because whatever the intention is, it is always the intention that the superior has, even if the Mass is said in some other place. My question is: If the Mass is said in a parish or chapel that already has an intention, how can the superior's intention supersede the place where the Mass is being said and a stipend is accepted and the Mass is an announced Mass? -- M.P., St. Petersburg, Florida

Q2: In my parish here in Nigeria, the pastor accepts multiple intentions for a single Mass. At the beginning of the Mass he reads the intentions out loud and invites the congregation to pray for these intentions as well as our own private intentions. I was always taught that a priest may only accept one intention per Mass. Please comment. -- M.J.G., Kaduna, Nigeria

A: I will try to answer these questions together since both refer to stipends.

The celebration of Gregorian Masses is regulated by a declaration published by the Sacred Congregation of Divine Worship on Feb. 24, 1967. The Gregorian Mass is a series of 30 consecutive celebrations. It is not required that the same priest celebrate all the Masses nor that they be celebrated on the same altar. Thus, if a priest who has accepted the obligation of celebrating the series finds himself impeded on any particular day, he may ask another priest to take the intention for him.

Likewise, it could happen that the priest cannot find a substitute and the series is interrupted because of an unforeseen impediment (for example, an illness), or for a reasonable cause (the celebration of a funeral or a wedding). In this case the Church has disposed that the fruits of suffrage (which, until that moment, Church practice and the piety of the faithful have attributed to this series) are maintained. The priest retains the obligation to complete the 30 Masses as soon as possible, but he need not begin the series anew.

This being the case, the celebration of a Gregorian series is incompatible with regular duties in a parish in which an intention has already been announced. A religious priest celebrates according to the intention of the superior only in those cases where there is no previously assigned intention. A priest working in campus ministry or some other apostolate with no fixed intentions can celebrate a Gregorian series.

Also, if the superior wishes to assign a Gregorian series to a religious priest, he must inform the priest. The priest can only accept if he has no other obligations that would impede his celebrating the series. It is necessary for the priest to be aware of the series in order to fulfill the obligation of the 30 Masses and seek a substitute if for a good reason he cannot celebrate the intention on any particular day.

It is true that canon law allows a priest to receive only one stipend a day. To wit:

"Can. 945 §1. In accord with the approved practice of the Church, any priest celebrating or concelebrating is permitted to receive an offering to apply the Mass for a specific intention.

"§2. It is recommended earnestly to priests that they celebrate Mass for the intention of the Christian faithful, especially the needy, even if they have not received an offering.

"Can. 947 Any appearance of trafficking or trading is to be excluded entirely from the offering for Masses.

"Can. 948 Separate Masses are to be applied for the intentions of those for whom a single offering, although small, has been given and accepted.

"Can. 951 §1. A priest who celebrates several Masses on the same day can apply each to the intention for which the offering was given, but subject to the rule that, except on Christmas, he is to keep the offering for only one Mass and transfer the others to the purposes prescribed by the ordinary, while allowing for some recompense by reason of an extrinsic title.

"§2. A priest who concelebrates a second Mass on the same day cannot accept an offering for it under any title.

"Can. 953 No one is permitted to accept more offerings for Masses to be applied by himself than he can satisfy within a year.

"Can. 954 If in certain churches or oratories more Masses are asked to be celebrated than can be celebrated there, it is permitted for them to be celebrated elsewhere unless the donors have expressly indicated a contrary intention."

There is, however, another document regulating this theme, the 1991 decree Mos Iugiter (AAS 83 [1991] 436-446). This decree modified the strict rule of Canon 948 and allowed some use of so-called cumulative intentions under certain strict conditions:

-- The donors must be informed of and consent to the combining of their offerings before the Mass for the collective intention is celebrated.

-- The place and time of each Mass must be announced with no more than two such collective Masses per week.

-- The celebrant may only keep for himself one stipend and must send any excess intentions to the purposes assigned by the ordinary in accordance with Canon 951.

There is, however, another practice of frequent cumulative intentions which is found in some countries with many poor Catholics and very populous parishes. This practice is common in some Latin American countries and may be the situation described by our reader in Nigeria.

In such circumstances, so many faithful request Mass intentions that it is impossible for the parish to celebrate a single Mass for everybody. In making the request the faithful do not seek an individual celebration but presuppose that it will be one of many intentions. The people's economic situation does not allow them to offer a proper stipend and thus makes transfer of the intention to other priests unfeasible.

In order to come to terms with this reality, certain novel solutions have been proposed. For example, last year a Mexican archdiocese established a fixed stipend for individual intentions but a totally voluntary offering for cumulative intentions, according to the possibilities of those making the request.

The archbishop's decree implied that, although the community celebrations would be more than twice a week due to the large number of requests, the directives of canon law and Mos Iugiter should be followed with respect to any offerings over and above the standard stipend.

Wednesday Liturgy: Follow-up: Rosary During Eucharistic Adoration

ROME, NOV. 9, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


In the wake of our observations on praying the rosary during exposition (see Oct. 26), a Texas reader commented: "In regard to the rosary prayed aloud during exposition: Should not the rosary group consider that others may prefer just being with the Lord in silence? I find it distracting unless it is a prepared part of the adoration along with announced prayers, homily, etc. In other words, if you have exposition of the Blessed Sacrament with no attached program, I feel all prayers should be silent to allow meditation by others."

In principle I would agree with our reader. Whenever exposition is organized it is courtesy and common sense to announce a program which includes a timetable of the various activities to be held during the time of exposition. The rosary is just one of many possibilities such as prayers, readings, the Liturgy of the Hours, and various litanies. In all cases sufficient time for silent prayer should also be contemplated. The recently published Compendium Eucharisticum offers an ample selection of suitable prayers that may be used.

Another reader asked whether a hymn to Our Lady could be sung at Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.

The norms for exposition clearly indicate a Eucharistic hymn or song should be song at Benediction. It may be the traditional Tantum Ergo or another Eucharistic themed hymn. Singing to Our Lady at this moment is somewhat incongruous from a liturgical point of view.

A Marian antiphon could be sung as a concluding refrain after the Blessed Sacrament has been reserved, either before or after the celebrant leaves the chapel.

Finally, a reader Parañaque City, Philippines, asked: "What is the stand or teaching of the Church if the rosary is recited during Mass?"

I believe the best answer to this are the words of Pope Pius XI (1922-1939): "The Church desires not that the faithful pray during Mass but pray the Mass." This principle is at the core of the post-conciliar reforms which seek to promote the full active and conscious participation of the faithful in the celebration of the sacred mysteries.

Indeed, the Pope's desire was already being fulfilled long before the Second Vatican Council as witnessed by the popularity of bilingual missals with which the faithful followed the prayers of the Mass.

That said, many Catholics in earlier times had used the rosary or other devotions as a means of keeping their minds attentive to prayer during the celebration. They knew they were at Mass, and they often fasted from midnight in order to receive Communion. Often it was their way of showing a deep faith.

Wednesday Liturgy: Extraordinary Form; Book of Blessings

ROME, NOV. 2, 2010 (Zenit.org).- Answered by Legionary of Christ Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum university.


Q: In the celebration of the extraordinary form of the Latin-rite Mass, do prescriptions and indults given for the ordinary form apply, such as those in the United States permitting the lay faithful to receive Communion in the hand and expressing a preference for the laity to stand while receiving Communion?

Another question: In 1989 the Book of Blessings was published in the U.S. The title page indicates that it is "The Roman Ritual" "Revised by Decree of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and Published by Authority of Pope John Paul II." It contains a decree from the U.S. bishops' conference that includes this statement: "From 3 December 1989, the First Sunday of Advent, the use of the Book of Blessings is mandatory in the dioceses of the United States of America. From that day forward no other English version may be used." Does this mean that the use of the "old" Roman Ritual -- for example, the 1964 version based on the 1952 editio typica -- is now forbidden? I know priests who use the old Roman Ritual. It certainly appears that some of the prayers in it are more robust, theologically elevated, and spiritually richer than their counterparts in the Book of Blessings. -- M.R., Corcoran, Minnesota

A: Regarding the first question there is some debate among canonists. From what I have been able to gauge, the majority believe that since Summorum Pontificum approved the liturgical books according to the rubrics of 1962, then later concessions based on the new liturgical books do not apply to them.

The most authoritative commentary is from now Cardinal-designate Raymond Burke, prefect of the Supreme Court of the Apostolic Signature. The original text was published in German as the preface to a book on Summorum Pontificum. The translation was provided by the New Liturgical Movement website:

"In the second chapter of his commentary, Weishaupt [Author of the Book in German] answers a number of practical issues that arise regarding the implementation of Summorum Pontificum and result from recent changes to the discipline of the celebration of the sacraments, such as e.g. those regarding female altar servers or lay people who perform the ministry of lectors or extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion. To answer these questions, the commentary correctly applies two general canonical principles.

"The first principle requires that liturgical norms, which were in force in 1962, are to be diligently observed for the celebration of the Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, for these norms protect the integrity of the Roman rite as contained in the Missal of Blessed John XXIII. The second principle states that the subsequent liturgical discipline is only to be introduced in the Extraordinary Form, if this discipline affects a right of the faithful, which follows directly from the sacrament of baptism and serves the eternal salvation of their souls.

"The application of these two principles to the cases mentioned leads to the conclusion that neither the service at the altar by persons of the female sex nor the exercise of the lay ministries of lector or extraordinary minister of Holy Communion belong to the basic rights of the baptized. Therefore, these recent developments, out of respect for the integrity of the liturgical discipline as contained in the Missale Romanum of 1962, are not to be introduced into the Extraordinary Form of the Roman rite. The commentary presents here in an impressive manner that the mutual enrichment of both forms of the Roman rite is only possible if discipline peculiar to each of the two forms is accordingly carefully observed."

Another recent document is a supposed form letter in German from the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei. The letter, dated June 21, 2010, contains the letterhead and seal of the pontifical commission but lacks a signature and protocol number. If it is genuine, then it is probably a prepared reply to a question presumably frequently put to an overworked office and merely corroborates the reasoning presented above, to wit: "In reference to your letter of 15 June, this papal commission would like to point out that the celebration of Holy Mass in the extraordinary form envisages the reception of Holy Communion while kneeling, as the Holy Host is laid directly on the tongue of the communicant. There is no provision for the distribution of Holy Communion on the hand in this form of the Holy Mass."

Regarding the Book of Blessings, the situation is somewhat more confused. Most commentators seem to favor the possibility of using the 1964 English translation but do not always present airtight canonical arguments. The promulgation of Summorum Pontificum has also modified the situation.

In the Introduction to the Book of Blessings, Chapter V, No. 39, deals with: Adaptations Belonging to the Conferences of Bishops. This chapter grants wide leeway to the bishops with respect to blessings, including adding new ones. With respect to the former ritual, No. 39c says that the conference has the faculty "to retain or to adapt blessings belonging to particular rituals or those of the former Roman Ritual that are still in use, as long as such blessings are compatible with the tenor of the Constitution on the Liturgy, with the principles set out in this General Introduction and with contemporary needs."

Since the bishops had the faculty to incorporate blessings from the older ritual into the new book, I believe that it was their intention that only those formulas eventually incorporated into the new book were to be used in the United States.

The publication of Summorum Pontificum has probably changed that situation. I believe that any priest may use the Latin blessings of the Roman Pontifical. It is true that the Blessings Book is not specifically mentioned in Pope Benedict's motu proprio, but it was listed in an information sheet issued by the Vatican Press Office as among the books required for celebrating the extraordinary form. It also follows logically that if the papal document permitted the celebration of the sacraments, it would naturally permit the sacramentals. Some sacramentals, such as the blessing of water and salt, are intimately linked to the sacramental celebrations themselves.

I also am of the opinion that it is possible to use the approved 1964 translation of the 1952 Book of Blessings. Summorum Pontificum permits the use of approved translations of the vernacular readings at Mass, and this certainly includes translations approved after 1962. The older Book of Blessings was also still in force in Latin until 1984 and in English until the present volume was published.

This opens up an interesting question as to whether the papal initiative also permits the use of translations of the extraordinary form officially approved before the conciliar reform. Bilingual rites for some sacraments and sacramentals were already approved by Popes Pius XII and John XXIII and were in use before the Second Vatican Council. Lacking any definitive statement from the Holy See, I am unable to give an answer. But the question is intriguing.

Some authors offer other arguments that might permit a partial use of the 1964 translation. Some say that "liturgical blessings" must be according to the new rite while "non-liturgical blessings," which are more flexible, may use the older texts.

I am not convinced of this distinction; it must be remembered that the Church holds that all the rites contained in the Book of Blessings are liturgical acts, including those imparted by laity.

Perhaps a better distinction would be between constitutive and invocative blessings. A constitutive blessing is one in which the person or object is separated from normal use and constituted as a sacred person or object. These blessings are reserved to an ordained minister: to a bishop (blessing of an abbot, consecration of a Church) or to a priest (blessing of a chalice). The blessing of devotional objects such as rosaries, medals and small crosses can be done by priest or deacon.

An invocative blessing is one that implores God's favor on the person or object blessed but does not change their nature nor reserve them for a sacred function. These are the vast majority of blessings.

Even if there is no general permission for the use of the 1964 translation, the fact that the present Book of Blessings offers a wide degree of flexibility to the celebrant would allow for the use of some prayers from the older ritual, especially with respect to invocative blessings and the simpler constitutive blessings. This would not be possible for the more important constitutive blessings such as those reserved to the bishop or the blessings of objects for the liturgy or public veneration.

Quite a number of ministers have expressed disappointment with the new Book of Blessings. The decree of approval states the reason for the new book: "In ordering the reform of sacramentals, Vatican Council II decreed that in their celebration special attention should be given to the full, conscious, and active participation of the faithful and that any elements should be eliminated that in the course of time had obscured the true nature and purpose of sacramentals ..."

The complaints about the result do not stem so much from the introduction of community blessings, of readings from Scripture, and of general intercessions. Rather, the complaints relate to the quality of the prayers of blessings themselves which often seem to lack a specific moment in which the person or object is clearly blessed or when to make the sign of the cross as is traditional in blessings.

In order to clarify the latter point the Congregation for Divine Worship issued a statement that the sign of the cross is made when the word "bless" is used, or, if this word is lacking, at the end of the prayer.

Article: The Glory of Humility

DEACON DOUGLAS MCMANAMAN

The word ‘human’ comes from the Latin ‘humus’, which means ‘dirt’ or ‘soil’. Man is from the earth.

Saint John the Baptist by Leonardo da Vinci

I've always been fascinated by the sluggishness of the human mind. The brightest human beings are really quite slow. "Brightness" and "speed" are relative terms. A thing is fast only relative to something else. A light might be bright, but only relative to something else. There are bright people in this world who are quick thinkers, but only relative to those around them.

I always get a sense of the slowness of my intellect when I listen to the Jewish comedian, Jackie Mason. I just can't keep up with him. He's too fast for me. And his audience is obviously quicker than I am, because they're laughing. And he is genuinely funny, but I need to slow it down and think about what he's saying before I can laugh.

I often tell my students that what they learn in the course of a semester, in their math class, for example, or in their chemistry classes, or physics, etc., took centuries for the most brilliant human beings to uncover. Once it has been uncovered, however, it appears to be so simple. Why did it take so long? This is true especially for philosophy. It takes years and years to dispose the intellect to learn such abstract truths, and from these truths it is possible to go on to demonstrate, through reason alone, the existence of God, and it is also possible, through reason alone, to show that God is one, eternal, the source of all that is good and beautiful, that He is Beauty Itself, Goodness Itself, and Truth Itself. And when we finally come to see it, we inevitably think: "This is so clear and simple; why did it take years to get this?"

The reason is that human beings, by nature, are slow. We are the highest beings on the hierarchy of material beings, but we are the lowest beings on the hierarchy of God's intellectual creatures. Below us are the animals, and below them are plants, etc., but above us are angels, who are immaterial creatures, and their knowledge does not depend on sensation, imagination, nor is it subject to the passing of time, because they are not physical and do not exist in time. Their knowledge is not encumbered by matter as is ours. They see at a glance what it takes centuries for human beings to learn.

The word 'human' comes from the Latin 'humus', which means 'dirt' or 'soil'. Man is from the earth. He is made of matter; he is a spirit and matter unity. As spirit, we can think and will, but as matter, we are weighed down, limited, and are vulnerable to destruction.

The word 'humility' is derived from the same word: "humus". A humble person recognizes his limits, his frailty and vulnerability to destruction. He realizes that he is, fundamentally, dirt (dust and ashes).

And so we have the misfortune of being at the bottom of the hierarchy of God's intellectual creatures. But maybe it's not a misfortune at all. Perhaps the angels of God envy us after all. There's no doubt, the glory of man does not consist in intelligence. Anyone who glories in his intelligence is in for a rude awakening when he discovers that his brilliance is only relative – compared to the choirs of angels, he's on the lowest rung of the ladder.

So what is man's glory? The glory of man lies in 'humility'. A man who is intelligent is like the angels, but imperfectly so. But when he is humble, he is true to himself. The angels can be humble, but if we want, we can outdo them in humility. They cannot recognize that they are fundamentally dirt (soil), because they are not. We can, however.

The proud take themselves very seriously, but among saintly people there really is a great deal of laughter.

And God became flesh, joined a human nature, to show us what it means to be man, to reveal to us our glory. The image that reveals to us our true identity is the image of the cross. Our power is in the power of the cross. And that's our glory. The angels cannot share in the sufferings of Christ, they cannot enter into the humiliation of the cross, but we can. The more we do so, the more glorious we become, paradoxically enough.

It is indeed sad to see that so many adults have missed this, especially those who rebel against God by writing books in an attempt to persuade others that God does not exist, that religion is evil, that man is the measure of moral truth, and that there is nothing higher than man, neither angels, God, nor truth itself. This is nothing more than that ancient tendency in man to ascend so as to take God's place, which originated in the sin of Lucifer, the cherubim angel who fell through pride and lured the first parents of the human race into the current of his own sin.

Our life must move in the complete opposite direction. The humbler we become, the more true to our nature we are. And you know, when that begins to happen, the more laughter will there be in our lives; for the word humour is also derived from "humus". The humbler we are, the more we are able to laugh at ourselves, for the less seriously do we take ourselves, and the more able we are to take in the humour that's always around us. That is why among the arrogant one does not encounter a great deal of laughter – except the sardonic kind that delights in the humiliation of others. The proud take themselves very seriously, but among saintly people there really is a great deal of laughter.

---

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Deacon Douglas McManaman. "The Glory of Humility." CERC (October 30, 2010).

Homily for the 30th Saturday in Ordinary Time. Printed with permission of Deacon Douglas McManaman.

THE AUTHOR

Doug McManaman is a Deacon and a Religion and Philosophy teacher at Father Michael McGivney Catholic Academy in Markham, Ontario, Canada. He is the past president of the Canadian Fellowship of Catholic Scholars. He maintains the following web site for his students: A Catholic Philosophy and Theology Resource Page, in support of his students. He studied Philosophy at St. Jerome's College in Waterloo, and Theology at the University of Montreal. Deacon McManaman is on the advisory board of the Catholic Education Resource Center.

Copyright © 2010 Douglas McManaman

Article: Vainglory: Seeking the Praise of Men

EDWARD P. SRI

Do you worry over what others think of you? Do you sometimes say or do things to draw attention to yourself? Do you replay conversations in your mind, wondering if you left the right impression? If so, you might be struggling with the vice known as vainglory.

According to St. Thomas Aquinas, "glory" denotes someone's excellence being known and approved by others. He explains that there is nothing wrong with others recognizing our good qualities and deeds. In fact, seeking to live in a way that inspires others to give glory to God and to pursue a more virtuous life is good. Jesus Himself said, "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father who is in heaven"(Mt. 5:16).

However, seeking human praise for its own sake is sinful. Such a person wants glory for himself more than he wants glory for God. He wants to receive the praise of men, which is a vain glory that is empty, fickle, and often off the mark. Aquinas explains that the glory we seek can be vain in one of three ways.

Symptoms of Vanity

First, it is vain to seek praise for something that is not truly praiseworthy. Of course, this would include seeking praise for sinful acts. The college student, for example, who hopes to gain respect from his peers for his drunkenness, his sexual exploits, or his cheating on an exam is pursuing not true, but vain glory.

Yet even devout Christians are susceptible to this vice when they plan their lives around the standards of happiness and success set up by the world. For example, a part of us might hope to gain respect from old friends and family members for having a successful career, wearing the latest fashions, having children succeed in school, living in a nice home, etc. These are not evil pursuits in themselves, but they can distract us from pursuing Christian ideals such as charity, generosity, simplicity, and humility. If these worldly pursuits hinder us from living a truly praiseworthy life-a life of virtue and holiness-then we may be seeking the vain glory of this world more than the glory of God.

Second, it is sinful to seek glory from people whose judgment is not sound. Most of us desire the approval of our bosses, parents, spouses, or friends. And this is natural. If, however, these people do not truly understand what a good, virtuous life is, we likely will be disappointed, frustrated, or misled. To seek their recognition would be pursuing vainglory, for they are not able to judge what is truly praiseworthy. They sometimes will praise the wrong things, and they will fail to recognize what is most noble in life. They might even look down upon aspects of our Christian life. Therefore, instead of seeking the approval of worldly men, we should seek the praise of Christ-and by extension, His faithful followers who judge by His standards, not the world's.

God's Glory or One's Own Glory?

Third, seeking glory is sinful if in one's heart, one desires human praise more than God's praise. Do we do virtuous deeds out of love for God and neighbor? Or is there a part of us wanting to be noticed and esteemed by others? For example, a parish catechist might pour her heart into her ministry partly because she loves the praise she receives from the pastor and her fellow parishioners for her good work. Similarly, Catholic parents might arrive at Mass early and train their kids to behave well during the liturgy, not just for the good of their children's spiritual development, but also because they like the attention they receive ("What a beautiful Catholic family!"). To the extent that we do good deeds in order to draw attention to ourselves and not to God, to that extent we suffer from vainglory.

Similarly, when it comes to devotional practices, Jesus said, "Beware of practicing your piety before men in order to be seen by them; for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven" (Mt. 6:1).

If we perform righteous deeds in order to receive human recognition, we spoil the gift we could have given to God.

This teaching challenges us to examine how pure our motives are when we practice our faith. Do we worship God and serve the Church purely out of selfless love for God, or is there a part of us selfishly seeking to receive attention and praise from men? Often, our motives are quite mixed. We may give time and money to the parish, but is there something within us hoping that others will notice our generosity? We may take time for prayer because we love the Lord, but is there a part of us also hoping our friends, our spiritual director, or the people we serve will notice and think better of us? We may practice mortifications such as fasting, but is there a part of us wanting to appear more devout than others?

If we perform righteous deeds in order to receive human recognition, we spoil the gift we could have given to God. We might receive applause here on earth, but Jesus says we will not receive a reward in heaven. On the other hand, the soul that desires to keep his piety hidden is the one who draws down the praise of the angels and saints. The soul that prays, fasts, and makes charitable contributions out of pure love of God-without seeking human praise-is the one who will be rewarded by the heavenly Father.

A Capital Vice

According to Aquinas, vainglory is a capital vice, meaning that it is a weakness that gives birth to many other vices. When our hearts are set on gaining the praise of men, we are likely to develop several other faults along the way. For example, we may seek to win people's attention through self promotion in our words. In conversation, we might drop certain people's names, point out our achievements, or exaggerate our successes with the hopes of having others esteem us highly ("He must be important"). Aquinas calls this vice boasting. We also might tend to throw ourselves into the center of attention through eccentric behavior, or by being "in the know" about the latest news or gossip, or by having the latest technology. Aquinas calls this fruit of vainglory love of novelties.

Hypocrisy also is a great danger for the vain person. The Greek word translated "hypocrite" means "actor" or "pretender."It is used in the New Testament to describe someone who, like an actor on stage, is concerned about projecting a certain character to his audience and pretending to be something he is not. Driven by his desire to receive praise from men, the hypocrite is more worried about giving the impression that he does good deeds than actually doing good deeds for their own sake.

The vain person also is more likely to fall into divisive actions in his attempt to show he is not inferior to others. Aquinas lists four such vices that breed divisiveness in one's intellect, will, speech, and deeds. First is the intellectual vice of obstinacy: "by which a man is too much attached to his own opinion," such that he is unwilling to accept another opinion that might be better. Second is a vice related to the will called discord, which is an unwillingness to give up one's own will and concur with others. The third vice is related to speech and is called contention, whereby a man likes to be argumentative, or as Aquinas says, "quarrels noisily with another." Fourth is disobedience: by which "a man refuses to carry out the command of his superiors."[1] Each of these smaller vices flows from the capital vice of vainglory. They support a man's vain drive to have others think that he is superior to others.

One last point: Magnanimity (treated in last issue's reflection) and vainglory are directly opposed to each other. The vain person is more concerned about receiving the praise of men than he is about living a truly praiseworthy life, whereas the magnanimous person seeks to do good and live an honorable life, even if he is never noticed. Such a virtuous man can be confident that even if no one on earth notices his righteous deeds, his heavenly Father sees and will reward him (see Mt. 6:4).

Endnote:

[1] St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II-II, Q. 132,Art. 5. "If we perform righteous deeds in order to receive human recognition, we spoil the gift we could have given to God. "

---

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Edward P. Sri. "Vainglory: Seeking the Praise of Men." Lay Witness (Jan/Feb, 2010).

This article is reprinted with permission from Lay Witness magazine.

Lay Witness is a publication of Catholic United for the Faith, Inc., an international lay apostolate founded in 1968 to support, defend, and advance the efforts of the teaching Church.

THE AUTHOR

Edward Sri is provost and a professor of theology and Scripture at the Augustine Institute in Denver, Colorado (www.augustineinstitute.org) and a frequent contributor to Lay Witness. He resides with his wife, Elizabeth, and their five children in Littleton, Colorado. Edward Sri is the author of Queen Mother, Mystery of the Kingdom, and The New Rosary in Scripture: Biblical Insights for Praying the 20 Mysteries. His books are available by calling Benedictus Books toll-free at (800) 398-5470.

Copyright © 2010 LayWitness