I'm not sure that I'm right to totally blame the Catholic students of The University of Bath for this latest crass display in church.
It was a poor attempt in the parish of St Peter and Paul, Bath, with students fundraising for the homeless by donning woolly hats and baking cakes (or, maybe, half baking them).
The parish priest must shoulder the lion's share of blame for not having the fibre to tell the students in a patient and loving manner that they should not raise funds for the poor by wearing silly woolly hats to Mass and expect the priest to do the same.
This is at the level of clown Masses (although I am uncertain if the hats were worn during the celebration of Mass - the fact that they were worn in church at all is.....plain silly).
And to support a charity that was voted as being the "top gay friendly charity" by Stonewall is pretty scandalous.
There are plenty of Catholic causes that support the poor and homeless and not the gay and lesbian community if you want to organise funds.
But this sorry tale is just symptomatic of the mindlessness of the faithful (and some of the clergy) these days.
Instead of developing a fundraising concept based upon enhancing reverence and piety they go for the moron option.
It's easy see? You don't have to engage brain.
Now, if they had a sponsored mantilla session in church, that would make sense.
It was a poor attempt in the parish of St Peter and Paul, Bath, with students fundraising for the homeless by donning woolly hats and baking cakes (or, maybe, half baking them).
The parish priest must shoulder the lion's share of blame for not having the fibre to tell the students in a patient and loving manner that they should not raise funds for the poor by wearing silly woolly hats to Mass and expect the priest to do the same.
This is at the level of clown Masses (although I am uncertain if the hats were worn during the celebration of Mass - the fact that they were worn in church at all is.....plain silly).
And to support a charity that was voted as being the "top gay friendly charity" by Stonewall is pretty scandalous.
There are plenty of Catholic causes that support the poor and homeless and not the gay and lesbian community if you want to organise funds.
But this sorry tale is just symptomatic of the mindlessness of the faithful (and some of the clergy) these days.
Instead of developing a fundraising concept based upon enhancing reverence and piety they go for the moron option.
It's easy see? You don't have to engage brain.
Now, if they had a sponsored mantilla session in church, that would make sense.
Demeaning the Holy Sacrifice of Mass. They cannot understand that Our Lord
ReplyDeleteis actually present Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity, made so by the ordained hands of the priest.
Got a news flash for ya. Most of these students seems to be women. You go on and on and on about "Mantillas" but seem TOTALLY unaware that the mantilla is a SPANISH cultural thing -- and ANY hat, "back in the REAL" day rather than the anachronistic fake-memory day would have been acceptable as a head covering for women. Remember KLEENEX was perfectly acceptable. So if you want to start rambling about "demeaning the Mass" start THERE. When I lived in the NE of the US growing up, mantillas simply weren't it, not until Jackie Kennedy started parading around in one. It may have been in the SW, but certainly not in the NE, although one sometimes did see them, the majority in the areas I lived in wore HATS. Any kind of a hat did.
ReplyDeleteAs for the charity, you don't say which one specifically. Now if this charity goes around throwing out condoms I'd agree, But I don't know that. Just because something is "gay friendly" doesn't mean they aren't also Catholic friendly. In my home diocese of San Diego, one of the charities they ran was a hospice for people dying of AIDS who had no where to go. Should they have stopped doing it because it could be conceived as "gay friendly."
I'd agree that the priest should wear only what is proscribed at Mass. No hats. Though oddly enough the TLM does have the priest wearing a biretta for brief periods when sitting down while the gloria or creed is being finished, and presumably they are PRAYING ALONG with those prayers too rather than sitting there thinking "I'm not praying because St. Paul said it was wrong to pray with my head covered." So either you're going to believe St. Paul on BOTH SIDES of the coin, or your just going to come to senses and realize that he was talking about something applicable to the particular situation in Corinth and it was his OPINION and not something written in stone handed down from God. Because if Paul WAS right on all he said, then the TLM should ditch those birettas for priests so they won't shame themselves or whatever Paul was on about.
I wonder if the charity was Encourage, which does stirling work to support those with SSA who are trying to lead a chaste life? I suspect not...
ReplyDeleteMM, no, it was St Mungo's. A charity that does good work but with the approval of Stonewall.
DeleteGem, as an European I am aware that the mantilla belongs to Spain. However, in Britain, prior to VII, women at Mass wore either a mantilla or a scarf or hat. It was roughly 50/50.
ReplyDeleteSo, we have the custom, in this country, of wearing the mantilla.
Don't get hooked up on St Paul, remember the humility aspect and remember also that it is a great privilege for women to be able to cover their heads at Mass. We men are disadvantaged. Life is so unfair.
I remember most women wearing a headscarf or hat. Berets were quite popular, I seem to recall. Interestingly as one passed the Anglican church in those days the ladies often appeared to be wearing some quite elaborate examples of the milliner's art- which seemed designed to get the vicar's attention!
DeleteI, personally, am of the opinion that gentlemen, too, should wear hats (as I do) so as to be able to doff them as a mark of respect when entering a church or other habitation.
Patricius, you are correct, as usual. I also wear a hat from time to time and doff accordingly.
DeletePrior to VII and even for several years after chatter before and after Mass in Catholic churches was non existant. Folk used to arrive at the church and what did they do first as they entered? Ladies brought out a headscarf or mantilla and gentlemen took off their hats or caps. This was the first preparation before entering into the presence of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament.
ReplyDeleteIs it a coincidence that once ladies started attending Mass with bare heads and gentlemen stopped wearing hats which they could then take off, the chatter before Mass became more prevalent? I think there may indeed be a connection here and would be interested to know what others think.
Well, they are certainly connected in that both bespeak a cessation of special, reverent actions and signs in the presence of Our Lord. Of course, dress for a priest at Mass is a wholly different matter than dress for a layman in attendance.
DeleteGem. Those are three boy altar servers standing with the priest. The lower picture has three girls. (my parish)
ReplyDeleteThe Charity in question is St. Mungo's.
ReplyDeleteMaybe you could further enlighten us, momangelica?
ReplyDeleteDid the altar servers and priest wear their woolly hats during Mass, or just put them on afterwards?
It seems that St. Mungo's is a charity for ALL homeless people, and that was a day designated to highlight their plight.
All credit to the young people of the parish for supporting such a worthy cause.
I'm sure Our Lord blessed their efforts.
Sue
Sue, it matters not as to whether the servers wore hats at Mass or just in church. Both would be irreverent but to wear a head covering at Mass would be grossly irreverent.
DeleteYou fall into the same trap as most liberals, that is, in believing that, any charitable cause is worthy.
We are bound to support causes that do not deny the teachings of Christ and the Magisterium. St Mungo's does not qualify.
Did Jesus specify the sexuality of the good Samaritan?
DeleteLove thy neigbour.
Sue
I presume you mean "sex". Still a non sequitur.
DeleteLynda, I was referring to :
Delete'MM, no, it was St Mungo's. A charity that does good work but with the approval of Stonewall....'
Sue
Gem, St Paul was not legislating for the Roman Rite in the second half of the second millennium; when the celebrant and ministers sit, they are not performing any liturgical function and so wear the biretta. Clerics assisting in choir wear the biretta when seated. In the OF the biretta is optional anyway, although I notice in St Peter's, Rome, most prelates in choir dress wear them.
ReplyDeleteThe photo-op with the woolly hats was fairly harmless, although it would have been better outside or in the church hall. I wouldn't wear one, but then I'm old enough to remember Benny in "Crossroads". But why is the priest still in Mass vestments? The altar boys have had time to change. He seems to have at least removed his maniple ...
Maniple John? Never seen one before until going to Trad Mass and never see it at any Catholic Mass in N.O. form
DeleteWe have to presume Wooly hats were worn throughout 'Holy' Mass as a special 'dispensation' was granted by the Bishop.