"What's My Line?".......

.....er....accountant?.......civil servant?......or, maybe, travel agent?

 

No. This man is the Principal of a 'Catholic'* College of Higher Education.

Good. So what?

Well, he is also a priest......a what?????.......yes, he is a priest, not just any old priest but a Jesuit priest and not just any old Jesuit Priest but the ex Provincial Superior of the British Jesuits.

Yet there is no dog clerical collar around his neck.

Does that send a message would you think?

What does it say?   

1. I am a modern priest who does not regard the wearing of a starched collar as having anything to do with my priestly ministry.

2. As a Principal I have to show my staff and students that I am prepared to tackle academic and secular issues without letting my vocation get in the way.

3. I do as I please. I like to be one of the boys and wearing this collar and tie does not constitute a barrier to people approaching me.

In reality it could be one or all of the above or, possibly, Father Principal Holman has another reason.

If so, it would be good to hear it, we are nothing if not even handed on the Hedgerow.

Of course, I should have known better because when I checked on the Jesuit website for the UK, most of the priests (?) appeared in casual mode.

I dislike wearing a suit and tie myself but, when I am on business or attending a function, I do so (religiously).

Priests are rarely off duty and although I believe that there must be some let up from wearing the collar at times of private socialising, they should wear the uniform of Christ for most of the time, especially if they are in public or have a public role to play.

* Strictly speaking Heythrop ceased to be 'Catholic' in 1971 when it was assumed into the arms of the University of London, but it still has Catholicism as its focus although, one might question......that...dare I say it?....... is it Sushi Catholicism?

That is, you pick up the bits that you fancy and let the conveyor belt take care of the miso soup.

The Heythrop website (from whence came the photograph) may be viewed HERE

And the British Jesuit one HERE

And if you have not yet nodded off you may read the blurb that the J's have on their site; if anyone can enlighten me as to what it means I would be forever grateful:-

Why should Jesuits engage in work with those who are poor and marginalised?

 Because, as our recent General Congregation put it: “Our Mission today is the service of faith, of which the promotion of justice is an absolute requirement.

Direct services of those in need; social and cultural analysis; theological reflection on questions of injustice; and campaigning alongside others who strive to make our world a more just place – these are the elements of Jesuit Social Ministry, a fundamental aspect of the Society’s work.

Hmmm......I think that I may be developing Tourette's Syndrome.

Our Lady who is "younger than sin"

 

I Have not yet heard Fr Pereira OP preach in the flesh so to speak but I have read some of his online sermons and they are very inspiring and heartening.

I was particularly taken by the content of this sermon on Our Lady on the feast of The Immaculate Conception, and so, with the kind permission of the Dominican online sermon database at http://torch.op.org/ here, in Our Lady's month, is the sermon in full:



Fr Leon Pereira OP



One of the frustrating features of life is the constant feeling of never quite getting there. When I was simply professed, people said, 'Ah, but you're not solemnly professed'. When I was solemnly professed, I wasn't yet ordained. When I became a deacon, my brothers pointed out that I was only a deacon.

And when I became a priest and came to Rome, I discovered that a distinction is made between junior and senior priests! The same is true in all walks of life; no matter how far you get, you are never quite there.
Do we value seniority so much because it is almost God-like? God, after all, is terribly senior; he's been around since before the world began. That would be true if God were a creature like us, temporal. But God is not old or senior. He is eternal, and that does not mean he is older than all things. It means he is prior to all things. From our perspective within time, God is 'ever ancient, ever new'.
So in a sense, God is newer than the newest thought you've just had. Because God is paradoxically 'ever ancient, ever new', his action in our lives is similar. Even though everything grows old and dies, the action of God's grace makes us young somehow.
At the end of Georges Bernanos's Diary of A Country Priest, the junior priest lies dying. His mentor, the senior priest, tells him to fix his mind on Our Lady: Our Lady 'the youngest daughter of the human race,' Our Lady who is 'younger than sin'. Because she is full of grace, Mary is so young in the order of grace that she does not and never did have that deficit of grace we call original sin.
This great mystery, the Immaculate Conception, is what we celebrate today.(sermon issued on December 8th) No matter what her age is in the order of nature, in the order of grace Mary is so young that she is untouched by sin and unrestrained by death, the first-fruits of Christ's victory.
This unique privilege of Mary, completely unmerited by her, seems to make her a super-human, beyond the reach of us mere mortals. But this is a problem with our perspective. Mary is the complete human being, and we are the defective ones. We are the hollow men, the badly drawn boys and girls, incomplete like the stick figures on the door of a public convenience. But Mary is a human being as she ought to be, replete with and completed in grace, fleshed out, perfect in her voluptuousness.
As a song by Mary Black puts it,

'She is the perfect creature, natural in every feature'

Our Lady is perfect because she is most perfectly natural, and she is utterly natural because she is filled-with-grace. Mary is full of grace because Christ is the fullness of grace, and it is from his grace, as Scripture says, that we have all received grace upon grace.
The salvation of Mary, the Immaculate Conception, is a pre-sacramental salvation. Mary does not need baptism. From the beginning of her existence she was utterly filled with God's grace. And this is why the Immaculate Conception is so important for us. Mary's pre-sacramental salvation is a sign of our post-sacramental life in the Kingdom of heaven.
What this feast means for us is that Christ's love does not stop with us merely being forgiven sinners, but it will transform us as though sin had never been. Our redemption will not be simply the happy end of a fraught journey. In our redemption we will be somehow mysteriously freed from our history. Even our sins will form the weave of a completed holiness. There will be no more striving to get there, because we will have arrived.

As Mary already is, so shall the whole Church be, as Scripture says, 'without spot or wrinkle or any such thing, that she might be holy and immaculate' (Ephesians 5.27).

Answers to the ten criticisms most often raised

Catholics who have little or no experience of the Latin Mass, Mass in the Extraordinary Form, have many pre-conceived notions.

They generally come in the form of a one off critical statement thrown into a general conversation at random making them difficult to respond to without a jerk of the knee.

Here are the responses to the top ten criticisms, in a more measured 'answer' format, please feel free to add more of your own in the comments box.

1. Most cottas are plain, not lacy.

2. Priests do not “gabble” the Latin

3. It is easy to follow if you have a Missal

4. The incense and the bells both serve a purpose

5. The priest is not turning his back to the people so much as facing God

6. It is not exclusive, many peasants in the Middle Ages coped quite well  

     with Latin

7. It’s quiet because you are in the presence of Almighty God

8. Plainchant is another link back to Christ, guitars aren’t

9. Wearing a mantilla is not a form of subjugation so much as an offering

    to God made by a woman

10. It is returning, it may be slow coming but coming it is!

The Catholic Church has failed and failed badly

At least, that is the case in England and Wales. I cannot really comment on Austria, Australia, The Netherlands, Spain, France and so on, it is not on my agenda, I must be somewhat parochial in this context.

"But", you say (if you are of a liberal persuasion at any rate), "we have a vibrant, active faith in this country and I love my bishop, Bill, he's so sweet."

To which I respond:
"Look at what the Church should be, don't look at what it has become today."

"Bare ruined choirs..."

So how has it failed and who is responsible?

Here are some of the key areas in which we have taken our eye off the thurible.......

1. Education - most Catholic Schools fail totally in providing knowledge and in inspiring zeal for the teachings of the faith (see Caritas in Veritate for an up to the minute example). This has been going on for a long time now and at least two generations have been lost as a result.
 I suspect that, most of them are now beyond re-evangelisation.

2. Adoption - where is the Crusade of Rescue today?
It is now a rather strange sort of mix of psycho/social mechanisms offering, on the one hand, psychotherapeutic counselling in schools and, on the other, an Adoption and Aftercare service that now no longer offers adoption.
Lewis Carroll is alive and well and living in St Charles Square!
Kowtowing to the impositions of homosexual legislation has lost the Church a valuable role in essential pastoral care.

3. Homosexual "marriage" - "a weak clergy lacking in grace" was how St Thomas More described the bishops and priests in the sixteenth century and the same could be said today with regard to their lack of enthusiasm (with one or two notable exceptions) in showing positive disapproval of moves to place homosexual unions on the same level as marriage between a man and a woman.
The scandal of the Soho Masses continues despite the fact that it isolates those afflicted with homosexual tendencies and keeps them compartmentalised away from "normal" Catholic congregations.
We don't have Masses dedicated to followers of fraud or bank robbery, so why should we ring fence Masses for homosexuals?

4. Admissions procedures for seminaries: we do know, do we not, that those charged with interviewing prospective seminarians operate a policy of refusing any young man with traditional tendencies?
If you want to join a seminary, hide your Rosary, burn your LMS membership card and tell the panel that you want to be a priest because you have a social conscience and climate change is something that we, as Catholics, do not address with enough conviction.

Never, ever, say the "L" word.
The very mention of the word "Latin" is enough to have you out of the door before you can say 'Novus Ordo'.

5. Faith and Morals - these have become dirty words, almost as bad as mentioning 'sin'. There is no longer any clarity with regard to Church Doctrine, we are fed a milk sop diet that leads to statements such as "Who knows what's down the road?" (to which the answer, is of course, "Hell").

6. Ignoring the Holy Father - it did not take the Bishops very long, in the aftermath of Vatican II, to adopt a unilateral declaration of independence. UDI has meant that instead of one Pope we now have a multitude of mini Popes who pay a passing lip service to Rome but then do precisely as they wish.

7. The blinkered laity - how quickly we scrambled onto the liberal cart and tripped over our guitars in the rush to 'modernise' a faith that has proved itself capable of sensible organic progression over the course of its history. It began with parish commissariats aka parish councils, then it spread to lay readers (and even lay preachers back in the sixties) and before long we had women sashaying across the sanctuary, bare headed and mini skirted.

Extraordinary Ministers morphed into "Eucharistic Ministers" and now we have them dishing out blessings. The congregations forgot about the Real Presence in the tabernacle (it does not take long to lose one's faith compass, see how quickly we became Protestant back in Henry VIII's time), in recent years genuflections were replaced by a cursory bow and, in the 'absence' of Christ, people began to chat - at the tops of their voices. "You see", they appear to be saying - "We are on such good terms with God He has become part of the furniture, we don't need all that holy Joe stuff".

I could go on, this list is not exhaustive.

But who is to blame? And what is the point in allocating blame?

Well there is a collective blame inasmuch that many sold out at the beginning and others have since joined the slide; clergy, nuns, lay men and women.

And now I have come to the conclusion that we have two churches, two faiths and I have nothing whatsoever in common with one of them, the Nuchurch lobby. They have no loyalty to Rome and, hence no loyalty to Christ. They might espouse a loyalty but it is meaningless because they do nothing other than play the role of the Pharisee, criticizing all that is holy and devout while beating their breasts and informing on any priest brave enough to wish to celebrate the Latin Mass.

The great majority of Catholics have forgotten the basic tenets of the faith. To them, the Latin Mass is a throwback to a darker time when the parish priest was likely to challenge them if they dressed inappropriately at Mass or expressed views in direct opposition to Catholic teaching.
They do not like discipline or rules; those infringe their personal beliefs. They are guided by a conscience that no longer has the required knowledge to make an informed decision, in short, they can barely be described as 'Catholic'.

Now compare the Church in England and Wales with a commercial organisation, such as Proctor and Gamble, the detergent manufacturers, or Tescos, Sainsburys and Asda.
 If, some 40 years ago they had seen a slump in their profits and a drifting away of customers what would they have done?

Well, a number of things but the point is, they would not have sat on their hands warbling "who knows what's down the road?"

They would have taken action. They would not have allowed themselves to be left with empty shelves and no products to go on them.
They would have ensured that they recruited the right staff and given them firm support and guidance.

This is something that the Church has not done.

It allowed the grossly awful "Weaving the Web" religious education series to continue ad nauseum in the Catholic Secondary School sector, it turned a blind eye to teaching on birth control and IVF, and it debased the liturgy to such a degree that you wonder at times if you are at a Catholic Mass or a New Age beanfeast.

It has done nothing with the rich inheritance left to it by the Son of God.

And, sadly, it is still at it. turning away young men from seminaries because of their adherence to orthodoxy, persecuting good priests who wish to offer the EF Mass occasionally and refusing to infuse order and integrity into the clergy who, by and large, run their parishes as it pleases them.

It is, of course, easy to blame the bishops but the laity must also shoulder the burden. I find it strange that many parishes can be governed by parishioners rather than by the Parish Priest. All too often it is the parish council that dictates the terms for parish and spiritual activity and the priest appears powerless to intervene.

If there is to be a programme of re-evangelisation later this year, as stipulated by the Holy Father, it should have the parishioners as the prime focus, not those who have "drifted", they should be the second wave.

Bring back genuflecting, dress codes, reception by mouth. Keep the churches open by day.

Dispense with Extraordinary Ministers, lay readers and the kiss of peace and demand silence before and after Mass.

That would be a start. In fact it would be a brilliant start.

But who will stand up to be counted?

For greater glory.....

Coming soon (June 1st in the USA, date unknown for Great Britain).

This film is the chronicle of the Mexican Cristeros war 1926-29 when an oppressive government commenced a programme of death and violence against the largely Catholic population.

This was the time of the martyr priest, Blessed Miguel Pro; the Church was under immense pressure but held true to its teachings.
Definitely a flim to watch out for - Viva Cristo Rey!

The Archdiocese of Birmingham and Tales from the Raj

EF Pastor Emeritus posted, a few days ago, on the news that Archbishop Longley of Birmingham had invested a leading member of the Sikh community as a Knight of the Pontifical Order of Pope St Gregory the Great.

The Sikh in question had done a great deal over the years in cementing inter-faith relations.
It would be churlish to pour cold water over efforts to bring two faiths closer together but it is a source of puzzlement to me as to why a religion that does not recognise the divinity of Jesus Christ should become a focal point for a Catholic community.
I don't see any advances with the Jehovah's Witnesses or the Mormons or the Buddhists for that matter. So why the Sikhs?

Now it happens that I am a fan of the followers of Sikhism; I like the way that they have integrated into Great Britain, the fact that they are industrious and  exemplars of good citizenship.

They are great fighters and were part of the allied troops in the two world wars and others besides.

They are also, in my mind, very similar to Liberal Catholics inasmuch that they have a rigid set of doctrinal beliefs that they then totally ignore.
Alcohol is banned in the Sikh faith but all the Sikhs that I  know, drink like  fish.
This is not a criticism of Sikhs or their faith, just an observation.

But I do know that, when we, as Catholics, are invited to a Sikh Temple for one of their services such as a wedding, male guests are expected to cover their heads. Often this is done with a handkerchief so that it appears as if the Monty Python cast are in attendance.

Fine, still no problem although, I do not think that I would readily attend a Gurdwara.

My concern is that, from the photographs I have seen, these eminent Sikhs wore their turbans in St Chad's Catholic Cathedral during their investiture. In addition, some 120 members of their community were in attendance and my guess would be that the majority of males wore turbans.

So, no big deal you might say. But I think that it is a big deal and for us to ignore it sends out a message that we are less than certain in our beliefs and, worst of all, that we do not really believe that the Son of God is physically present in the tabernacle.

There is also the issue of reciprocity - what's sauce for the goose and all of that.

Birmingham's PR machine produced a neat little report that talked in terms of the investiture being a "historical" and a "ground-breaking" event.

That may well be but I still struggle to understand the whole affair.
Inter-religious dialogue is a pretty meaningless affair, except when a political or social conflict exists; the Holy Father has demonstrated superbly how to conduct such relationships - teach, encourage and welcome into the fold, that is his way and it should be Birmingham's way.

Archbishop Longley described it thus in his sermon:

 “The faith communities in this city are often among the first to recognise emerging social needs within our local communities. We want to develop effective partnerships among ourselves and with other agencies wherever appropriate to help meet these needs. May today’s celebration encourage us to continue along the pathway of this commitment not only for the good of our own faith communities but for the common good.”

I would really like to know what he means by "effective partnerships" and how they comply with Christ's command to go and teach all nations.

And it would be good if our leaders spoke in terms of "spiritual needs" rather than social ones - we have structures to cope with those.

Techniques for Thurible Management

Recently there has been a brief flurry of correspondence between Fathers Finigan (see Fr Tim's account HERE)

and Zuhlsdorf regarding the rather profound issue of whether to clink or not clink the thurible at High Mass.

This prompted me to jot down a few notes on thurible etiquette especially as, at Mass last Sunday, the celebrant was all but knocked out by an enthusiastic MC who incensed over enthusiastically.

Of course, the modern day altar server starts with a massive advantage over us pre Vat II lads. You see, back in my day (yawn) the charcoal was pure and unadulterated, much like myself, ahem.

Today’s charcoal is impregnated with chemicals that make it catch light immediately a flame is within three feet of it whereas, back in the dark ages, an altar boy had to suffer third degree burns to his fingers and work at it for half an hour before a faint glow would result.

When the new charcoal was introduced it was called atomic charcoal – such were the times we lived in then.

So today, the thurifer must commence his duties in the sacristy at least ten minutes before Mass commences; he must light the charcoal and loosen up his thurible arm by swinging the thurible vigorously in an anti clockwise direction at least twenty times at head height to ensure that the charcoal is glowing nicely and his muscles are toned up.

Then he must practice his pre incense reception technique: this is where he prepares the thurible for the celebrant to place incense within. Now thuribles come with a complicated chain and pulley arrangement that require the skills of a brain surgeon and double jointed wrists and fingers.

What many young servers today do not appreciate is that the top half of the thurible (which rises according to the aforesaid chain and pulley controls) is apt to become welded to the bottom half unless it is raised slightly at all times.

Failure to do so may mean that the thurifer has to hold the base and jerk the chain in order to release the two halves.

That may sound simple but, dear reader, the bottom half tends to become roasting hot and it takes the courage of a St Laurence to withstand the agony when it is grasped.

 An added hazard arises if a slow or elderly priest is the celebrant: the poor thurifer who has to grasp the white hot base may be hanging on for dear life and biting his tongue in order that he does not let out a series of wimpish shrieks; any burns received under such circumstance account for a considerable remission of time in Purgatory.

So, having prepared fully before Mass it only remains for the thurifer or MC to appoint a boat boy, that is, the smallest altar server available who will hold the incense “boat” and proffer it to the priest at the appropriate times.

The servers then process to the sanctuary, led by the thurifer and it is wise to allow a good ten feet between him and his fellow servers on the principle that, if the thurible does not concuss them, the smoke will surely render them unconscious.

                                This helpful video shows the best use

                                                 of a thurible and is an example of the

                                          good relationship between MC and Thurifer

Now we come to the technique known as ‘offering the thurible’.

The moment when the thurifer, accompanied by the boat boy, opens the thurible ready to receive the grains of incense.

If, as stated earlier, the top half has not been kept slightly out of contact with the bottom half you are likely to have a “locked thurible” situation and this can often result in what is known as the “thurible dance” because, as the thurible is jerked apart red hot fragments of glowing charcoal scatter across the sanctuary carpet and Father’s blood pressure rises dangerously high.

The “stomp” begins when priest, thurifer and boat boy desperately jump on the burning charcoal chips in an attempt to salvage the carpet and avoid an even worse conflagration.

At last all is under control and the priest administers the incense and proceeds to give a demo of how to handle a thurible.

This tends to upset the thurifer as Father makes it look terribly easy and when the MC finally takes the thurible and hands it back to its owner it is snatched ungraciously out of his hands.

Now the thurifer is in an awful strop and expresses his feelings by swinging the fully “loaded” instrument to and fro scattering the acolytes and creating a smoke screen that blinds the MC and causes the smaller boys to pass out.

Finally, as a layman I hesitate to take side on the ‘to clink or not to clink’ issue but, after due consideration I have to come down in favour of clinking.

A thuruble that does not clink is like a sanctuary bell that does not ring – useless. But, it is really down to the incensing technique of the thurifer as far as obtaining a resounding clink is concerned.

The fingers of the left hand* of the thurifer should firmly grasp the top of the chains while his left hand takes hold of the bottom part of the chains about 12 inches above the actual vessel part. The chains should pass betwixt the second and third digits allowing the thurifer to ‘flick’ the lower section at the moment that he raises his arms to incensing mode. After ‘flicking’ he brings the lower section back so that it collides with the chain and a click results.

A full click is known as a clang while a partial click is classified as a chink. A clang is by far the most desirable sound to make.

* If the thurifer is right handed, the reverse should apply

An easy and straightforward process that can be painlessly mastered over a period of some forty years or so.

Please note - the following clip shows an MBA in Advanced Thurible Management programme in operation:

Feast of Our Lady of Czestochowa

Ballad to Our Lady of Czestochowa

Lady and Queen and Mystery manifold
And very Regent of the untroubled sky,
Whom in a dream St. Hilda did behold
And heard a woodland music passing by:
You shall receive me when the clouds are high
With evening and the sheep attain the fold.
This is the faith that I have held and hold,
And this is that in which I mean to die.



Steep are the seas and savaging and cold
In broken waters terrible to try;
And vast against the winter night the wold,
And harbourless for any sail to lie.
But you shall lead me to the lights, and I
Shall hymn you in a harbour story told.
This is the faith that I have held and hold,
And this is that in which I mean to die.



Help of the half-defeated, House of gold,
Shrine of the Sword, and Tower of Ivory;
Splendour apart, supreme and aureoled,
The Battler's vision and the World's reply.
You shall restore me, O my last Ally,
To vengence and the glories of the bold.
This is the faith that I have held and hold,
And this is that in which I mean to die.

Hilaire Belloc



Outside the abortuary - Report from Bath

Well done to the SPUC group who turned out in force in Bath last week despite media hype that suggested that the opposition was going to be "active".

Here's their account:-

"Small group turned up who tried to oppose us. We thwarted them by turning up an hour earlier.
 SPUC - Thirtyfive + seven children. Opposition - 12.
What a relief as it was imagined a 100 were coming to give us a drubbing after all the incitement in the local paper and radio publicity. Phew!

Grateful thanks to all who supported us with their prayers, time, and support and especially the priests of the Bath Deanery who were so encouraging in the face of the storm."

The man from Del Monte may say "Yes"......

.....but the Priest's Housekeeper says "No!"

I phoned the presbytery of a certain parish to determine the day and time of the next EF Mass.

The Priest's Housekeeper said that she would consult the diary.

"Yes" she said; "it is definitely at 11am"

"On a weekday or on a  Sunday?" I asked.

PH: "Oh you can't have it on a Sunday"

Me: "We certainly could"

PH: "No you can't, 'they' wouldn't like it

Me: Who's 'they'?

PH: The people who come to Mass on a Sunday, they wouldn't like it

Me: "You mean they wouldn't like an Extraordinary Mass?

PH: "Yes, they just wouldn't like it

Me: (Breathing deeply and thin red mist rising) "But the Holy Father likes it"

PH: "But they just wouldn't..." blah, blah

So, it seems as if the Parish Priest cannot say "Yes"....the people of the parish can say "No" and the Priest's Housekeeper has assumed the role of bishop.

Where's the man from Del Monte when you need him?

A moral dilemma......what would happen if.....

.....for example, the British Government banned all In-Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) procedures. With immediate effect.

Hats in the air you might say. Possibly a first step towards abolishing abortion.

Well, let's face it, it's unlikely to happen, in the near future certainly.

But the question is...if it did happen, what would the Church say regarding the thousands of embryos held in frozen suspension?

How would we, the Government or the Church decide on the future of such embryos.

Would it be licit to implant them?

Surely we could not destroy them?

Help!


PRAYER REQUEST:

Please pray for a 3 year old niece who has just been diagnosed with leukemia and who has been taken into hospital today, thank you.

Our Lady Queen of the May