Thursday, November 02, 2006

All Souls Day




All Souls Day Liturgy Alert!

At my parish of St. Stanislaus, we will be having Mass this evening, at 6:30 PM, for All Souls Day.

Since I became pastor here a little more than a year ago, I have been working to make our liturgical life here at St. Stanislaus more fully and authentically Catholic, and to make our liturgies more solemn and beautiful. Toward that end, I have been introducing Gregorian Chant (back) into our Masses, and encouraging the development of the musical resources of the parish.

Those efforts are beginning to bear fruit, and will do so in a special way tonight.

I was very fortunate, a few months ago, to be introduced to a musical ensemble called "The Schola of the Chair of St. Peter". They are a group of Catholic gentlemen from around the Grand Rapids area who have been gathering to learn and sing Chant for the past decade or so. Their knowledge and mastery of chant is deep and rich. They sing from time to time at a few parishes, but, unfortunately, as is the case in much of the US, the Catholic musical environment in this area hasn't been very chant-friendly.

I have made them the official "Chant Schola In Residence" here at St. Stanislaus, and they will be singing here for the first time tonight. They will be singing the Gregorian Requiem Mass, complete with the Dies Irae, which will be sung during communion following the Communion antiphon. My congregation has already learned the Ordinary of Mass XVIII, so this will not be a mere spectator experience, but will, I hope, embody the ideal of participatio actuosa as envisioned by the fathers of Vatican II.

Also, for the first time here in at least 25 years, I will use the Roman Canon in Latin for the Eucharistic Prayer.

In future posts I'll describe more of what we're doing here at St. Stanislaus to implement the "Reform of the Reform".

I realize that many of my readers will live too far away to come to this Mass, but pray with and for us, as we offer this sacrifice of praise to the Father.

Oh, and by the way, my vestments for tonight's Mass — black, naturally.

Monday, October 30, 2006

Ignore Celebrities When They Speak On Politics or Morality

Remember last week, how actor-turned-poster-boy-for-human-embryo-harvesting Michael J.Fox injected himself into Missouri politics by making a political ad exploiting his Parkinson's disease in favor of a Missouri candidate and ballot initiative? Rush Limbaugh rather hamhandedly took Fox to task for the ad, and Limbaugh and other critics were in turn denounced for mocking Fox's disease.

Well, first it came out that Fox has admitted that he has gone off his medication when he has testified before congressional committees and the like in favor of embryonic stem-cell research. So apparently Mr. Fox isn't above exploiting his illness when it suits his causes.

But Sunday, when appearing on "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos, he admitted that he hasn't even read the initiative at the heart of the controversy. He said:
And so I have to qualify it by saying I'm not qualified to speak on the page-to-page content of the initiative. Although, I am quite sure that I'll agree with it in spirit, I don't know, I— On full disclosure, I haven't read it, and that's why I didn't put myself up for it distinctly.

He hasn't read it, but he's sure that he'll "agree with it in spirit." Well, thank you very much for that expert guidance, Mr. Back-To-The-Future.

He then goes on to explain how he's "really sincere" about how he feels about this issue, and how he's "prayed over" this, etc. I've provided his post-admittance-of ignorance remarks here, with some interpolated remarks in italics:
But I've made this point before, and I really am sincere in it, in spite of my ignorance, that anybody who's prayed on this, and thought about it, and really considered it and can't get their mind around or their heart around the idea of embryonic stem cell research, I'd go to war for your right to believe that. And you're right to feel that. Because it's really all just about our feelings. After all, that's all I'm going with here. I respect it. I truly do. Because I'm just that kind of guy.

My point is, and our point as a community, is we have a very good and supportable conclusion based on hype, emotionalism, and misplaced sympathy, that a vast majority of people in this country are in favor of science as described by journalists and pundits who are even less knowledgeable than I, playing a leading role in making changes in the future hey, Back To The Future! and believe in embryonic stem cell research. I really, really, believe in it. Can't you feel my sincerity?.

Michael J. Fox does suffer from a terrible disease, and he should have our sympathy for that. But that sympathy should not make him invulnerable to criticism for exploiting his illness or allowing it to be exploited for political purposes. And when he intrudes himself into a poitiical debate about which he is manifestly and admittedly ignorant, he reveals himself to be either a dupe, an idiot, or both.

Seriously, when are we going to stop looking to actors and rock stars for guidance on moral or political issues?

Making Political Decisions, or, "Making Political Speeches"?

With the election coming up, I felt it incumbent on me as a pastor to offer some guidance to my parishioners on how the teaching of the Church should guide our political thinking and decsion-making. The USCCB statement "Faithful Citizenship" while having some good points, is hoplessly general and bears all the hallmarks of a document written by a committee, which seems to have taken as it's motto "Whatever We Do, We Can't Say Anything That Might Upset Someone".

Now, I recognized that doing so in my parish would be a delicate matter: My predecessor (I've only been here a little more than a year) eschewed engagement in current issues and controversies to the extent that he would not even allow a pro-life organization to operate openly in the parish, fearing that to do so would be "too divisive." (I have remedied that situation since coming here.) So I knew I'd have to approach this subject diplomatically.

I decided to offer Bishop Thomas Olmsted's excellent booklet Catholics In the Public Square to my parishioners as guidance in how to think about political issues as a Catholic. Bishop Olmsted's booklet does a very good job of presenting Church teaching, and the hierarchy of issues that confront us, faithfully yet in a non-partisan way.

I introduced it by making the following remarks at the end of Sunday Masses:

Making Political Decisions


As I have said before, we are all called to be missionaries in the world, commissioned to sanctify the world around us. That means we need to bring our faith in Christ to bear on every aspect of our lives: our relationships, our moral decisions, our business dealings, and, yes, even our political lives. We have an election coming up in a couple of weeks, so it is important to remember that part of our call to sanctify the world, and make Christ the Lord of all, is to make our political order reflect and uphold the teaching and values of the gospel. And so the Church gives us principles and guidance to follow as we debate and discern our political decisions.

Now sometimes people will say, "Why can't the Church just stay out of politics?" Well, there's a sense in which that kind of thinking is right: For example, clergy and religious brothers and sisters are not supposed to be involved in political activism or hold political office. And, certainly, the church doesn't and won't tell you "vote for this or that candidate", or, "vote for this or that party."

But there's a sense in which the wish "Why doesn't the Church stay out of politics?", is wrong: As I have said before, to be a disciple is to give ourselves to Christ completely. There's no holding back part of our lives if you want to be a disciple. So a Catholic politician or citizen can't say "My life as a Catholic is over here, and my politics is over there." That's like saying "I'll be a disciple in this, this, and this, but sorry Jesus, I'm not going to be a disciple in that." That would be morally dishonest. That's false discipleship.

So the Church, while not telling us who to vote for, does give us principles on which we are called to base our politics. These are principles like "Every human being is created in God's image and likeness and has intrinsic dignity and value." And these principles have an impact on how we may rightly make political decisions. Sometimes the impact isn't immediately clear on some issue, and the Church doesn't hold out a definitive teaching. In these areas Catholics may legitimately disagree: For example, right now a debate is going on about immigration reform. Catholics can, and do, take a range of positions on this issue and still be faithful. But there are some other issues which are clear, and on which the Church has given a definitive binding teaching. For example, the Church teaches us that abortion is always wrong, and there are never any circumstances which justify the intentional killing of an unborn child. On this issue, it is not possible to take a position or support a politician that opposes this teaching, and still be a faithful Catholic.

So we need to think about, weigh, and pray over these and other principles and issues in order to participate in our political life as faithful Catholics. In order to help you do that, Bishop Thomas Olmsted, the bishop of Phoenix, Arizona, has written a booklet called "Catholics In The Public Square" which outlines the principles we should use in deciding which candidates and legislation to support. It's not about telling you "vote for candidate A or B", it's about helping us to think about politics as faithful Catholics and good citizens. Copies of this booklet will distributed by the ushers after Mass, free of charge. I encourage you to take a copy of it, to read it and pray over your voting decisions, so that we can be true disciples in every aspect of our lives, and so build up the Kingdom.


I'd like to report that all of my parishioners received these remarks in the spirit of pastoral guidance with which they were intended. And I imagine that they were taken that way by most of my parishioners. But some people didn't take it that way, and complained. One man took me to task for "making political speeches". I'll have to post one or two of those conversations later...