TLM Server Training: This Weekend in the Anchorage Area (Eagle River)

I am very sad. I will most likely not be able to go through the TLM server training sessions this weekend in Eagle River. As many of you know... I am a fan of the Mass said according to the usus antiquior.


This weekend, a priest from St. John Cantius - Chicago (Sancta Missa)will be instructing those wanting to learn to serve in that form of the Mass. As fortune would have it, I have to be in Anchorage on Saturday for an exam, so I thought God was smiling on me a bit. Until I learned the details of the training.

From the CatholicAnchor.org:

There will a training session for those interested in learning to serve the Tridentine (Latin) Mass. On Aug. 5-6. Father Bart Juncer of Chicago will hold a session from 9:30 a.m. to 11 a.m. at St. Andrew Church in Eagle River. Those interested in attending need to call Rita Montella at 745-3229.

 With the possibility of us moving... and/or not having a job soon, it just doesn't make sense to go up to Anchorage and spend 3 nights in a hotel. But I encourage ANYONE else that can make it up there to attend the training. Especially folks on the Kenai. Having men and boys trained as servers for the TLM in one less impediment on the path to getting more TLM's said in parishes.

I am quite sad that we can't make it up there for the entire weekend. In fact, due to our short trip, I will also be missing the TLM at HFC, and the DL at St. Nicolas' :(

If you have any questions, please feel free to email me.
For those attending... I will be praying for you.

The 'Traditional Mass' as an element of re-Christianization

The following is the Q&A of Father Goodwin, an FSSP Priest. Have to give a Sword-dub (h/t) to NLM for this article. (Emphasis mine.)

ZENIT: Why do you feel that following the traditional Roman rite is vital to "re-Christianizing" our world?

Father Goodwin: The Traditional Mass is a very important element in the re-Christianization of the world because it so clearly and fully embodies the faith of the Church. The whole notion of Christ's sacrifice is the central point of the Mass.


Of course, the primary objection that's most often offered to it is "Why would you want to celebrate the Mass in a language that people don't understand?" But that makes the assumption that the relationship of people to the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is primarily one of comprehension; that the Mass is a piece of information to be learned and understood.


Today, Mass is most often celebrated in the world where people can see everything that is going on and understand everything that's said. Can we honestly say that the result of this has deepened their appreciation for what's going on? When pollsters tell us that 80% of Catholics under the age of 59 have a non-Catholic idea of what the Blessed Sacrament is, the whole communication thing may not be so successful. That should not be the primary goal. The primary goal is the worship of God.


The Mass is not a bunch of jumbled elements that we put together or we construct in order to make something that is meaningful to us. The Mass is something that exists in itself, to which we conform ourselves, so that we can more perfectly unite with God.


I think that's what young people find in the Traditional Mass. They're not looking for an explanation; they're looking for the presence of Christ. This is, in a very primary way, about reverence, piety and devotion.

The answer that he gave to the above question, succinctly explains the nature and appeal of the Usus Antiquior. In his final statement he explains why young people are drawn to the Extraordinary Form. An attraction, that for years, modernist leaders in the Church said did not exist.

The argument was always, "We need to make the Mass relevant to the youth." Fr. Goodwin explains that just the opposite is true: that the youth are reverent, pious, and devoted and look for Christ, so that they may conform themselves to HIM in order to more perfectly unite with him.

Continuity - Our Past Is WHO We Are

So for those of you that follow this blog somewhat regularly, you might know that we are traveling 4000+ miles in the next few days, and have the opportunity to have our first child baptized with our family and friends back in Michigan. You may also know that the Baptism will take place in the older rite, the usus antiquior, or Extraordinary Form. The Church where we will be having the Baptism and attending Mass (Our daughters first) will also be in the usus antiquior.

Where the Baptism will take place is in a church that is over a 100 years old. What is fascinating about all of this is that I was told today that my Great Aunt was baptized in that very church over 80 years ago.

This is why our Traditions in the faith are so important. This link will span 4 generations, 4 families, 80+ years, thousands of days, - but only 1 church, 1 Sacrament, and 1 Form. This is what Universal is SUPPOSED TO MEAN! There is an importance to commonality and universality that is important to our Faith, and to our humanity. There is a reason people dress alike, talk alike, and generally conform to one another when they are in some proximity (whether geographic, emotional, or spiritual) with one another. Such universality bonds us to other humans. Why do we possess the emotion of sentimentalism? Why do we cry when aged loved ones die? Because who we are is born out of who they WERE. A word that many people are fond of is CONTINUITY, and I am likewise fond of it.

Christ's death on the Cross is not simply an ancient event, but at Pope Benedict explains it is a "once FOR ALL" event. Meaning, that it was done and is done constantly throughout time. His love for us is never-ending there is a continuity to the past with our Faith because God made his gift unceasing and therefore it is the PERFECT SACRIFICE even today, thousands of years later.

So why are we so desirous of CHANGING? Are we really so short sited that our personal comfort and enjoyment trumps our desire and innate longing for our past? Are protestant praise and worship songs really necessary for the one hour a week that many give back to the God that gave us everything?

I understand why people are more comfortable at Modern Rite churches. I even get why some of the liturgical practices have developed in the past 40 years. I also understand why people prefer the vernacular. Yet... why must the form change continually? Why must we destroy continuity of the past and refuse to replace it with ANY continuity, even that of a modern quality? If we come from our families past, and one day are intended to do the same for our children; what happens when we break that chain? They are not longer linked to us... and the past which created us. While this may be OK for some, the question that is not often asked is this:

When we destroy the continuity of our Faith and our Past, are we destroying a part of who we are?

So while many are more "comfortable" in the modern I look to the Traditional. I'll admit... it isn't an every week thing. [Mostly because I live in Alaska and the closest usus antiquior celebration is 4 hours away.] The Tradition in our Faith is what has made our Faith what it is. Without that tradition our faith would be malleable and weak. In fact, there would be no continuity or universality at all.

In a few days time I will celebrate that continuity - and when I look to the Cross, when I receive the Body of Christ, and when my daughter's original sin is wiped clean I will think of the tie that binds us all together - Christ. For it is HE that links us all and gives us the opportunity to live with him forever and ever with all of those that have gone before us and laid the path upon which we walk.

-Posted by: Joe

A new TLM/FSSP? website resource...

Ran across a new website on Rorate Caeli:


http://traditionalparishes.net/

From RC:

Traditional Parishes of the Roman ChurchThis aims to be a complete directory of all personal parishes in the Catholic world, dedicated to the Traditional Latin Mass.Please email the webmaster at contact@traditionalparishes.net to suggest additions to the website.

It will be interesting to watch how this site grows.


-Posted by: Joe

Not everything in Detroit is ugly... St. Josaphat's - Detroit

Now this is a church...

St. Josaphat, Roman Catholic Church - Detroit, Michigan

This is one of the Churches in Detroit that regularly celebrates Mass in the usus antiquior.

The outside is just the beginning...

-Posted by: Joe

Baptism - UPDATE

I am VERY EXCITED! My wife and I just finalized plans for our daughters baptism. It will be in the usus antiquior!!!

Aside from my affinity for the usus antiquior in general, the decision was actually very intentional and prayerful. My wife and I discussed it at length, compared both the Modern Roman Rite and the Tridentine Rite, and decided based on more than just the "style" of the rites. In other words, the decision was more than just a substance vs. style, or style vs. style determination. In fact, my wife is more comfortable with the Modern Rite than the older rite, but she really appreciated the side by side comparison of the two forms of Baptism. 

I will update more as we get closer. I would like to have someone video it, but I think video taping religious events whether it be a Mass, Sacrament, or ritual, should be done with the same sort of reverence and preparation that one undertakes in terms of conducting the said event.

There are some questions lingering in my mind, which I may pose on here in regards to having such a public/family event in the older rite knowing that none of my family is very familiar with it.

The Churching of Women

(From the New Liturgical Movement)

Today was the feast of the Presentation and Purification. As usual, because I am on Alaskan time, the entire Traditional Catholic Blogging World posted about this, so I will refrain from being redundant. For those looking for more explanation click the following links:

• New Liturgical Movement - Feast of the Presentation and Purification
• Father Acervo - Presentation of The Lord

Something that I read about a while ago that really peaked my interest, that also correlates to this feast, is the ritual of "The Churching of Women." [The below is taken from a post on the Archdiocese of Washington D.C.'s blog by Msgr. Charles Pope]:

Though it has never been required by the Church it is a beautiful way to welcome back and bless a woman who has perhaps been away for a few weeks  giving birth. She has labored well for her family, her child and the Church and this ritual can serve simultaneously as a blessing and thanksgiving extended by the Church to the noble women who are our mothers. The blessing can be given after a baptism, after mass, collectively to recent mothers, or individually. It is true that the current baptismal rite contains a blessing for the mother but this older rite is a more single and special blessing. The Pope’s recent Motu Proprio permitting the older forms of the sacraments to be used has made these older rituals also more available.

I think this would be an AWESOME ritual to reinstitute across the board. I think it could EASILY be done after Mass at most parishes. If I am correct, the ritual itself is OUTSIDE of the context of Mass, so there is no problem in performing it in Churches where only the Novus Ordo Mass is used.

How better to promote the Pro-Life message of the church, and a very spiritual, traditional, and meaningful way to honor the sacrifice and blessings of motherhood? Aside from the occasional mention at a "Mother's Day Mass" when does the Modern church honor the Mother? Heck, many of the Marian Feasts have become "optional" or "not required in the U.S." If we don't honor Mary, why would we honor other women?

Like many other areas of our faith, I think it would serve us well to return and reclaim the traditional aspects of our faith that served many of our ancestors quite well.

A good explanation is found on the Archdiocese of Washington's (D.C.) blog:
The Churching of Women - AOW
A PDF of the ritual can be found here: The Churching of Women

More Resources:

• New Advent - Churching of Women
• WDTPRS - Father Z. - Churching of Women
• Fish Eaters - Churching of Women

-Posted by: Joe

The Spirit of Liturgical Reform - Part II: Spirit of the Liturgy

This post is Part II of a series of posts that I am doing about a talk Msgr. Marini gave at the Clergy Conference in Rome. Read part one here. The original talk was posted on the New Liturgical Movement which you can read here. Some of the other parts of the talk were handled much more adeptly by Father Z. which you can read here - Liturgical Form and here - Active Participation. I decided to tackle the more basic aspects of the talk.

This particular portion of the talk focused on then Cardinal Ratzinger's book: The Spirit of the Liturgy. It is the overview of the Liturgy itself. In my original post I discussed how both the Holy Father and Msgr. Marini stress the importance of CONTINUITY. This begins to dive deeper into how the Liturgy exists in time and place and the importance of the Liturgy as it is intended to exist. 

My emphasis will be bold-underlined and my comments will be in red:

1. The Sacred Liturgy, God’s great gift to the Church.


We are all well aware how the second Vatican Council dedicated the entirety of its first document to the liturgy: Sacrosanctum Concilium. It was labeled as the Constitution on the sacred liturgy.


I wish to underline the term sacred in its application to the liturgy, because of its importance. As a matter of fact, the council Fathers intended in this way to reinforce the sacred character of the liturgy. [Sacred is important here. Obviously Msgr. Marini wants to call to our attention how important the council Fathers felt that calling the Liturgy Sacred was.]


What, then, do we mean by the sacred liturgy? The East would in this case speak of the divine dimension in the Liturgy, or, to be more precise, of that dimension which is not left to the arbitrary will of man, because it is a gift which comes from on high. [In other words the East views the Liturgy stemming FROM GOD TO man.] It refers, in other words, to the mystery of salvation in Christ, entrusted to the Church in order to make it available in every moment and in every place by means of the objective nature of the liturgical and sacramental rites. [Objective here means unalterable or truth. If Christ is Truth, then the Liturgy is an objective expression of the Mystery of Salvation that Truth gives to man.] This is a reality surpassing us, which is to be received as gift, and which must be allowed to transform us.[Here nothing is said of us giving to God, but instead we are to receive.] Indeed, the second Vatican Council affirms: “...every liturgical celebration, because it is an action of Christ the priest and of His Body which is the Church, is a sacred action surpassing all others...” (Sacrosanctum concilium, n.7)


From this perspective it is not difficult to realise how far distant some modes of conduct are from the authentic spirit of the liturgy. [This statement expresses the idea that there are some modes of conduct which are in fact incompatible with the Liturgy. To use a term from my last post, there is NO CONTINUITY.] In fact, some individuals have managed to upset the liturgy of the church in various ways under the pretext of a wrongly devised creativity.  [Although in my last post I argued for continuity and understanding that both the new and old form of the Mass are valid and beautiful this sentence explains that not "anything" goes. There are in fact certain things which so disrupt the continuity of the Liturgy as to be wrong. This is usually done through creativity.] This was done on the grounds of adapting to the local situation and the needs of the community, thus appropriating the right to remove from, add to, or modify the liturgical rite in pursuit of subjective and emotional ends. For this, we priests are largely responsible. [Although he places blame on the priests, many congregations are to blame as well. Many times when reform to the proper liturgical practices were proposed in "creative" dioceses the people fought against the reform in an effort to retain their "emotionally comfortable" forms of worship.]


For this reason, already back in 2001, the former Cardinal Ratzinger asserted: “There is need of, at the very least, of a new liturgical awareness that might put a stop to the tendency to treat the liturgy as if it were an object open to manipulation. [READ: The Liturgy is NOT OPEN TO MANIPULATION.] We have reached the point where liturgical groups stitch together the Sunday liturgy on their own authority. The result is certainly the imaginative product of a group of able and skilled individuals. [This is important, especially for the Rad-Trads out there: the people who make these creative decisions are NOT bad people or even unskilled in what they do. It is their product which is wrong, not necessarily their hearts.] But in this way the space where one may encounter the “totally other” is reduced, in which the holy offers Himself as gift; what I come upon is only the skill of a group of people. It is then that we realise that we are looking for something else. It is too little, and at the same time, something different. The most important thing today is to acquire anew a respect for the liturgy, and an awareness that it is not open to manipulation. [Simply put, CONTINUITY.] To learn once again to recognise in its nature a living creation that grows and has been given as gift, through which we participate in the heavenly liturgy. To renounce seeking in it our own self-realisation in order to see a gift instead. [The Liturgy is ABOUT GOD, not about us.] This, I believe, is of primary importance: to overcome the temptation of a despotic behaviour, which conceives the liturgy as an object, the property of man, and to re-awaken the interior sense of the holy.” [!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!] (from ‘God and the World’; translation from the Italian)


To affirm, therefore, that the liturgy is sacred presupposes the fact that the liturgy does not exist subject to the sporadic modifications and arbitrary inventions of one individual or group. [Our job as individuals and lay people is to attend Liturgy and accept the gift, not to CREATE with the Liturgy.] The liturgy is not a closed circle in which we decide to meet, perhaps to encourage one another, to feel we are the protagonists of some feast. The liturgy is God’s summons to his people to be in His presence; it is the advent of God among us; it is God encountering us in this world.


A certain adaptation to particular local situations is foreseen and rightly so. The Missal itself indicates where adaptations may be made in some of its sections, yet only in these and not arbitrarily in others. [Local customs and adaptations are allowed and EVEN ENCOURAGE but in their RIGHTFUL PLACE.] The reason for this is important and it is good to reassert it: the liturgy is a gift which precedes us, a precious treasure which has been delivered by the age-old prayer of the Church, the place in which the faith has found its form in time and its expression in prayer. [GOD knows what he wants and what we need better than we do. We should accept this graciously and humbly.] It is not made available to us in order to be subjected to our personal interpretation; [!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!] rather, the liturgy is made available so as to be fully at the disposal of all, yesterday just as today and also tomorrow. “Our time, too,” wrote Pope John Paul II in his Encyclical letter Ecclesia de Eucharistia, “calls for a renewed awareness and appreciation of liturgical norms as a reflection of, and a witness to, the one universal Church made present in every celebration of the Eucharist.” (n. 52) [Continuity of the past, present, and future. Pope Benedict uses the term: "Once-FOR-All"]


In the brilliant Encyclical Mediator Dei, which is so often quoted in the constitution on the sacred Liturgy, Pope Pius XII defines the liturgy as “...the public worship... the worship rendered by the Mystical Body of Christ in the entirety of its Head and members.” (n. 20) As if to say, among other things, that in the liturgy, the Church “officially” identifies herself in the mystery of her union with Christ as spouse, and where she “officially” reveals herself. What casual folly it is indeed, to claim for ourselves the right to change in a subjective way the holy signs which time has sifted, through which the Church speaks about herself, her identity and her faith! [The Mass is not OUR expression to God. We must realize this. IT IS NOT OURS! The Mass is a gift and revelation to us.]


The people of God has a right that can never be ignored, in virtue of which, all must be allowed to approach what is not merely the poor fruit of human effort, but the work of God, and precisely because it is God’s work, a saving font of new life. [The Mass could not and cannot act in its Mystery if it were ours to manipulate. Instead, Salvation form in the Mass exists because it is wholly God.]


I wish to prolong my reflection a moment longer on this point, which, I can testify, is very dear to the Holy Father, by sharing with you a passage from Sacramentum Caritatis, the Apostolic Exhortation of His Holiness, Benedict XVI, written after the Synod on the Holy Eucharist. “Emphasising the importance of the ars celebrandi,” the Holy Father writes, “also leads to an appreciation of the value of the liturgical norms... The eucharistic celebration is enhanced when priests and liturgical leaders are committed to making known the current liturgical texts and norms... Perhaps we take it for granted that our ecclesial communities already know and appreciate these resources, but this is not always the case. These texts contain riches which have preserved and expressed the faith and experience of the People of God over its two-thousand-year history.” (n. 40) [Continuity and norms ENHANCE the Liturgy. It is the Continuity which creates the sharing and unification of the Body of Christ through time. Continuity leads to universality which is the essence of our faith. Universality can only be achieved through texts and forms.]

It is sometimes argued that the usus antiquior or Tridentine Rite is archaic and not relevant to modern people. Yet, this argue can not hold water when viewed from the proper perspective from which we should look at the Liturgy. There is little that I need to say that hasn't been said by Msgr. Marini. The Liturgy must be understood as a GIFT from GOD which should exist in its SACRED form. We as people should not take it upon ourselves to try and interpret or manipulate it to appease our desires or emotions. Instead we should accept the Mass as God's gift to His bride as a pure expression of His love and desire for the Salvation of man. It is a "once-for-all" Mystery that was given to us in order to grant us everlasting life with Him.

-Posted by: Joe

The Spirit of Liturgical Reform - An Intro

If you are wasting your time and reading my blog and have not "The Spirit of the Liturgy" by then Cardinal Ratzinger, stop what you are doing, purchase it, and read it. It is amazingly well written and explains the purpose of the liturgy in a way we can all understand and NEED to understand. Seriously, go now. [Click on the pic below]

Recently the Clergy Conference in Rome had a presentation about this topic. Specifically the talk was about the importance of the Spirit of the Liturgy and the reform of our current liturgical practices to recapture this "Spirit." This talk is posted at: The New Liturgical Movement. The website, which I have linked before and is on the sidebar, was also linked by Father Z. who did an EXCELLENT inline commentary on the presentation. You can find it here, and will teach you a whole lot more than I ever could. The post I am linking is Father Z's commentary on the "Benedictine Arrangment" which is an explanation of a liturgical way of celebrating the mass in lieu of ad orientem but still accomplishes the same goal. Read his post here: Fr. Z's Commentary on Msgr. Marini's Liturgical Form. Father Z has also done an AWESOME post on active participation which is written in the same vain. Read that here: Fr. Z's Commentary on Active Participation - From Msgr. Marini

So instead of trying to improve or comment on things that are already written I would like to comment on the more basic elements of the talk. The talk was given by Msgr. Guido Marini who is the Pontifical Minister of Liturgical Ceremonies. [Does that make him PMLC Marini?] This first portion is his introduction to the talks that Fr. Z has commented on. The talk stems from the book mentioned above. I will do a commentary below on his intro. I will do a separate post about one of his more substantive areas. I hope this encourages to think about the Liturgy differently, and hopefully it will also encourage you to read, "The Spirit of the Liturgy."

Here is Msgr. Marini's introduction from his talk taken from the New Liturgical Movement [My comments are in red, my emphases in the original are bolded]:

I propose to focus on some topics connected to the spirit of the liturgy and reflect on them with you; indeed, I intend to broach a subject which would require me to say much. Not only because it is a demanding and complex task to talk about the spirit of the liturgy, but also because many important works treating this subject have already been written by authors of unquestionably high caliber in theology and the liturgy. I’m thinking of two people in particular among the many: Romano Guardini and Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger.

One the other hand, it is now all the more necessary to speak about the spirit of the liturgy, especially for us members of the sacred priesthood. Moreover, there is an urgent need to reaffirm the “authentic” spirit of the liturgy, [He is asserting the notion that there is a specific "authentic" spirit to the liturgy which exists and one assumes is universal.] such as it is present in the uninterrupted tradition of the Church, and attested, in continuity with the past, in the most recent Magisterial teachings: starting from the second Vatican council up to the present pontificate. I purposefully used the word continuity, a word very dear to our present Holy Father. He has made it the only authoritative criterion whereby one can correctly interpret the life of the Church, and more specifically, the conciliar documents, including all the proposed reforms contained in them. How could it be any different? Can one truly speak of a Church of the past and a Church of the future as if some historical break in the body of the Church had occurred? [This is vitally important - he does not say that Vatican II is incorrect, nor does he say the past is better, instead he speaks of CONTINUITY.] Could anyone say that the Bride of Christ had lived without the assistance of the Holy Spirit in a particular period of the past, so that its memory should be erased, purposefully forgotten?

Nevertheless at times it seems that some individuals are truly partisan to a way of thinking that is justly and properly defined as an ideology, or rather a preconceived notion applied to the history of the Church which has nothing to do with the true faith. [I do not dare accuse any of this, but it is possible that many of our extreme bloggers on both ends of the spectrum might want to take this idea to heart. Faith and not ideology is key.]

An example of the fruit produced by that misleading ideology is the recurrent distinction between the preconciliar and the post conciliar Church. Such a manner of speaking can be legitimate, but only on condition that two Churches are not understood by it: one, the pre Conciliar Church, that has nothing more to say or to give because it has been surpassed, and a second, the post conciliar church, a new reality born from the Council and, by its presumed spirit, not in continuity with its past. This manner of speaking and more so of thinking must not be our own. [IMPORTANT!!] Apart from being incorrect, it is already superseded and outdated, perhaps understandable from a historical point of view, but nonetheless connected to a season in the church’s life by now concluded. [This cannot be overstated. I should have bolded the whole paragraph and in fact this paragraph is my catalyst for this entire post. It speaks to my recent post and explains that we must not suppose an "either or" solution to our liturgical reform.]

Does what we have discussed so far with respect to “continuity” have anything to do with the topic we have been asked to treat in this lecture? Yes, absolutely. The authentic spirit of the liturgy does not abide when it is not approached with serenity, leaving aside all polemics with respect to the recent or remote past. The liturgy cannot and must not be an opportunity for conflict between those who find good only in that which came before us, and those who, on the contrary, almost always find wrong in what came before. The only disposition which permits us to attain the authentic spirit of the liturgy, with joy and true spiritual relish, is to regard both the present and the past liturgy of the Church as one patrimony in continuous development. [This man understands words. He uses continuous and development at the end of this thought. I think it is safe to assume that the liturgy while universal is not static throughout history.] A spirit, accordingly, which we must receive from the Church and is not a fruit of our own making. A spirit, I add, which leads to what is essential in the liturgy, or, more precisely, to prayer inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit, in whom Christ continues to become present for us today, to burst forth into our lives. Truly, the spirit of the liturgy is the liturgy of the Holy Spirit.

I will not pretend to plumb the depths of the proposed subject matter, nor to treat all the different aspects necessary for a panoramic and comprehensive understanding of the question. I will limit myself by discussing only a few elements essential to the liturgy, specifically with reference to the celebration of the Eucharist, such as the Church proposes them, and in the manner I have learned to deepen my knowledge of them these past two years in service to our Holy Father, Benedict XVI. He is an authentic master of the spirit of the liturgy, whether by his teaching, or by the example he gives in the celebration of the sacred rites.

If, during the course of these reflections on the essence of the liturgy, I will find myself taking note of some behaviours that I do not consider in complete harmony with the authentic spirit of the liturgy, I will do so only as a small contribution to making this spirit stand out all the more in all its beauty and truth. [This introduction lays the groundwork for what is to come. I don't believe that Msgr. Marini suggests in any way that the past or present liturgical forms cannot posses this true spirit. Instead he is only denying the idea that only one or the other may do so.]

This introduction to his talk is crucial to understanding his comments on Pope Benedict XVI's work "The Spirit of the Liturgy." Msgr. Marini is well aware of the current state of Liturgical practice, the reforms of Vatican II, and the current "reform of the reform" occurring through the efforts of Rome and specifically the Holy Father.  I don't think anyone is more capable and appropriate to speak on this subject than the man responsible for coordinating the Liturgical celebrations of the Pope. I think many of us in the Cathologosphere would do well to heed his words regarding the idea that we must strive for CONTINUITY both with the past, present and future.

"Rad Trads" - an explanation.

So uber-blogger Mark Shea blogged a grea post [which word becomes the verb here?] today about Radical Tradionalists, or "Rad Trads": Mark Shea - "Rad Trads"

As a TRADDY or Traditionalist, I like to think of myself acting properly in terms of how I practice my faith, and relate it on this blog. I also know that for SOME I am not Traditionalist "enough" to really be considered a Traditionalsit; while others think of me being "too rigid" and Traditionalist and therefore closer to a "Rad Trad" than I actually am.

I don't always agree with Mr. Shea, but I feel that I agree with most of his post. The clincher for me is how he explains any "RADICAL" form of  "sub-culture" or "piety":  that once a sub-culture or piety reduces the ENTIRE CATHOLIC faith to itself and its own rules, there is a problem. I would agree.

So while I may prefer certain things, and even bemoan others, I do not think any one "movement" is wholly incorrect. Likewise, I think the Catholic Faith would be better served if more people acted with this this same set of principles. I know that for the most part this is more a creature of the Cathologosphere, but even as such it still does damage to the Faith at large because it pits brother against brother.

As a parting note, I do not want to suggest that we should not be free to be critical of those things which are contrary to the Catholic Faith or its teachings. Yet, we should not throw the baby out with the bathwater. In other words we need to do our diligence in determining those things which we need to criticize and those that we need to praise - as well as those things we need to discard and keep.

Baptism Class

My wife and I are going to our Baptism class at our church tonight. It should be interesting because it is the first bit of formal instruction we will receive in our new parish.

I have done some reading on it recently in preparation, but granted my reading has been focused on the older Tridentine Rite. So that could prove interesting come tonigh.

I don't really know what to expect. I don't know if one of the priests is going to do it, or if it is one of the lay leaders. (Hopefully a priest.) I also don't know to what extent we will be instructed. Since I have never gone through this before, I really don't know what to expect. As I said, I read through the older Rituale Romanum from 1964. So the background and commentary from that is part of my knowledge now, so I will be interested to see what we learn tonight.

I should read through the current rite of Baptism to be at least equally prepared. Especially since the Tridentine Rite is quite sparse here Alaska. I will update in a future post our experience... but in the meantime feel free to describe your experiences in the ComBoxes.

((**UPDATE**)):
The Baptism class was really nice tonight. One of the priests did it and everything he said was right on track. He even covered the fact that the FORM of the rite must be done PRECISELY and you can't just "make up words" to say.

Because we aren't 100% sure if we are having the Baptism here or back in Michigan, I am a little torn. If we have it here, we get to be with our new parish, friends, and we get to introduce our child PROPERLY to their parish. If we go home, we get the Tridentine Rite, our family, and our friends. I know God will make everything work perfectly, I think I am just getting nervous!