Cleansing Fire

Defending Truth and Tradition in the Lay-Run Roman Catholic Diocese of Rochester

Archive for May, 2011

Priestly Narcissism

May 31st, 2011, Promulgated by Diane Harris
 
Recently, we did a Newsletter review of the article “Messing with the Mass” by Paul and Daniel Vitz, published in the November 2007 issue of Homiletic & Pastoral Review.  It is an excellent article, which is well worth re-reading, given its application to so many distressing issues in DoR.  You can find the article on-line at:
 
Review / Summary of Vitzes’ Article:
 
The authors cite Christopher Lasch’s emphasis of the decline of a“sense of historical time as disconnecting from the past, and the rejection of the future too, leading to the “self” becoming “the absolute center” of values and pre-occupation.  “Such an attitude is a form of idolatry,” allowing the “present moment to dominate consciousness.”   Then Christianity becomes an “embarrassment,” and “judged as having no future.”  “Preoccupation with the ‘now’ and narcissism go hand in hand.”  The authors also analyze the morphing in the new age from the self-actualization of Rogers and Maslow to a kind of “spiritual narcissism,” of the type: “When I pray, I pray to myself.”  (Perhaps like the righteous Pharisee in the Temple?)   
 
“Since Vatican II the Mass has fallen victim to various kinds of irregularities.  We will examine a previously neglected aspect of the situation — namely, the psychological reasons   motives.  We propose that the primary motivation … derives from underlying narcissistic motives – that is, extreme self-love … basic anti-Christian … significance of contemporary cultural narcissism … applied to the psychology of many American priests.” 
 
 The authors state: “…we can see deeply rooted psychological motives behind the American priests who ‘individualize’ the Masses they celebrate, placing their ‘personal stamp’ on the liturgy”… to make the Divine Liturgy conform to their own tastes and views.”  
 
The authors  give five signs of priestly narcissism, noting that just two are sufficient for the characterization of narcissistic:  
 

1. Requires excessive admiration; with this comes extreme sensitivity to criticism.

2. A sense of entitlement, of unreasonable expectations of favorable treatment and of automatic compliance by others with one’s suggestions and expectations; e.g.: “Rules don’t apply to me.”

3. A belief that they are superior, special or unique and expect others to recognize this; that they should only associate with other people who are special or of high status.

4. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors and attitudes.  At times priests show this in their liturgical style, emphases or innovation…they assume the right to change the liturgy.

5. A lack of empathy, an unwillingness to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others … contempt or anger toward those who are offended by changes in the liturgy — often changes that have no real canonical support.

“This secular spirit … was explicitly self-indulgent and self-aggrandizing.  The rationale of those who “personalize” the liturgy … clearly … rejects the Church’s history and tradition … by those who should be most closely wedded to the Church – priests.”…The common contemporary focus on being “relevant” is a straightforward articulation of making the Mass focus on the “now” with a serious neglect of where the Mass came from and where it is leading us.  To be relevant is to be involved in the present rather than serving as a fixed reference point. … “The ‘now’ is … an expression of narcissistic preoccupation.”… Ego Renewal. 

The authors go on to criticize applause in the Mass (as Pope Benedict has done) as modeling the Mass on show business and public demonstrations of emotional support at the expense of Christ and an attitude of reverence. They warn of narcissism among the congregation as well as the priest, even leading to narcissism … bordering on heresy, … almost presenting the Mass as “a concelebration of the assembled faithful themselves rather than a concelebration of Christ’s presence in the Eucharist.”  They remark about “a growing sense that the music at Mass is more a performance than anything else.” 

   In “The Spirit of the Liturgy,” then Cardinal Ratzinger writes:

    “Only respect for the liturgy’s fundamental unspontaneity and pre-existing identity can give us what we hope for: the feast in which the great reality comes to us that we ourselves do not manufacture but receive as a gift…. The life of the liturgy does not come from what dawns upon the minds of individuals and planning groups … it is God’s descent upon our world, the source of real liberation.” 

Now in Fifty-Two Languages!

May 31st, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

Realizing that we have a growing assortment of readers whose primary speaking language is something other than English, we have decided to enhance the inclusivity of Cleansing Fire by providing our readers with a handy translation feature. If this interests you, direct your attention to the right navigation bar on the main page (cleansingfiredor.com). To translate this page, hover your mouse over the “Translate” button and select your language of choice. If your language does not appear in the 16 shown, click on “36 more languages” to [hopefully] find what you are looking for.

The translation button also appears on individual articles situated between the article text and its comments. The procedure to translate an article is the same; hover your mouse over the translate button and click on the desired language.

The feature may not be perfect, but it provides a pretty good translation using the Google Language API. Performing a translation will translate the entire page, including the article and reader comments.

Laypeople cannot generally confer blessings

May 31st, 2011, Promulgated by Abaccio

While Fr. Tomasso sat idly, watching EMHC’s distribute Holy Communion in Geneva, I had the misfortune of attending Mass at St Michael in Penn Yan, wherein, next to Fr. Tunnicliff, a female EMHC proceeded to pretend to bless the children who were too young to receive Holy Communion.

She signed their foreheads with the sign of the cross, muttering some words of blessing.  The problem?  She cannot confer blessings on children who are not her own, and certainly cannot give a blessing in the manner of a priest during the Mass!  This is an absolutely atrocious blurring of the lines of the ministerial priesthood. Because of this action, these parents and/or children incorrectly believe they received some sort of blessing.  Sorry folks, but the same thing happened there as happens whenever Mary Ramerman speaks the words of consecration: absolutely nothing.

If you still receive from EMHC’s, please note that they cannot confer blessings on you or your children who are not receiving the Eucharist.  (In fact, I argue that even priests should not be doing this  at the time of communion.  Instead, people ought to make a Spiritual Communion, as the faithful receive a blessing at the end of Mass, “May almighty God bless you, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost Amen.”)  If you see this happening in your parish, please bring it up to your parish priest.  This leads to nothing but confusion, just as the appointment of  lay “Pastoral Administrators” and Communion services does.  (See here for an example of the latter)

 

Extraordinary? No!

May 31st, 2011, Promulgated by Abaccio

We’ve all seen or heard about the antics commonly present at Masses in the Diocese of Rochester centering around the distribution of communion (such as attempting to forbid reception kneeling or on the tongue, or the incredible overuse of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion, failure to perform the ablutions, a layperson taking responsibility for the reservation of the Eucharist in the Tabernacle instead of the priest….and so on)

A friend alerted me to an occurrence at Our Lady of Peace in Geneva this Sunday, which I had previously noticed a few months back.  After distributing Holy Communion to the EMHCs this Sunday, Fr. Paul Tomasso proceeded to…sit down in his chair, rather than distribute Communion to the faithful, instead choosing to allow the six EMHC’s to do the job themselves.  In addition to being utterly despicable in its laziness, and wholly unpastoral, it violates the GIRM and Redemptionis Sacramentum!

Redemptionis Sacramentum states:

[156.] This function is to be understood strictly according to the name by which it is known, that is to say, that of extraordinary minister of Holy Communion, and not “special minister of Holy Communion” nor “extraordinary minister of the Eucharist” nor “special minister of the Eucharist”, by which names the meaning of this function is unnecessarily and improperly broadened. (Our Lady of Peace calls them, on their website, “Communion Minister”)

[157.] If there is usually present a sufficient number of sacred ministers for the distribution of Holy Communion, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion may not be appointed. Indeed, in such circumstances, those who may have already been appointed to this ministry should not exercise it. The practice of those Priests is reprobated who, even though present at the celebration, abstain from distributing Communion and hand this function over to laypersons.[258] (REPROBATED!)

[158.] Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged.[259] This, however, is to be understood in such a way that a brief prolongation, considering the circumstances and culture of the place, is not at all a sufficient reason.

Meanwhile, the GIRM notes:

GIRM 162. The priest may be assisted in the distribution of Communion by other priests who happen to be present. If such priests are not present and there is a very large number of communicants, the priest may call upon extraordinary ministers to assist him, e.g., duly instituted acolytes or even other faithful who have been deputed for this purpose. In case of necessity, the priest may depute suitable faithful for this single occasion.

Note here that the office of acolyte is reserved to men alone.  How many parishes have even tried to use instituted acolytes, the “ordinary” extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion?  It is only due to a distinctly feminist agenda that we see so many female EMHC’s.  It is certainly not the will of Holy Mother Church.

In any case, it seems clear that Fr. Tomasso’s occasional practice is egregiously wrong.

A view from across the pond

May 30th, 2011, Promulgated by Mike

Fr. Simon Henry serves as a parish priest in a small town about 20 miles northeast of Liverpool, England. Here is his take on the Diocese of Lincoln, published on Friday …

The Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, has a Catholic population of about 95,000, 148 diocesan priests, of whom 123 are active in the diocese, 7 active outside the diocese, and 18 retired. Oh, and they have 41 seminarians.

The Diocese of Lincoln has been conducting an annual census of Mass attendance during the past few years. The diocesan average is 60% Sunday Mass attendance.

Bishop Bruskewitz fully expects that the priests of the Diocese of Lincoln faithfully follow the rubrics and words of the Roman Missal and does not tolerate liturgical ‘creativity’.

Bishop Bruskewitz conducted the ordinations last Saturday [i.e., May 21] at the FSSP Seminary in his diocese from whence the newly ordained Fr Matthew McCarthy will be coming to offer Solemn Mass here at St. Catherine’s this coming Friday 3rd June at 5.30pm. A Votive Mass of the Miraculous Medal in recognition of our parish patron.

[Bishop Bruskewitz ordained two men for the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter on May 21 and three men for the Diocese of Lincoln on May 28.]

Interestingly, the small French Diocese of Frejus-Toulon with an encouraging bishop – Mgr Dominique Rey has re-opened its own diocesan seminary where they now have about 75 seminarians. The bishop intends that every parish church will once more have its own priest. Thanks to the number of seminarians, this is a realistic objective.

I couldn’t help but see the sad contrast here in England where my Alma Mater, Ushaw College is to close its doors after more than 200 years … There seems to be life in some seminaries but not in others. What are the factors that bring this new life, I wonder?

Bishop Rey & Bishop Bruskewitz encourage the celebration of the Extraordinary Form, insist on good seminary formation, vigorously defend the Holy Father, insist on orthodoxy from their clergy, have no truck with the secular agenda, and have a clear vision of the way forward for their dioceses – and the vocations keep coming!

Remind me again why Ushaw is closing? Oh, right.?

Happy Memorial Day

May 30th, 2011, Promulgated by Gen

Enjoy the holiday, folks. Here’s a little something for your consideration:

“O mother! What do they mean by blue?
And what do they mean by gray?”
I heard from the lips of a little child
As she bounded in from her play.
The mother’s eyes were filled with tears;
She turned to her darling fair
And smoothed away from the sunny brow
The treasure of golden hair.

“Why, mother’s eyes are blue, my sweet,
And grandpa’s hair is gray,
And the love we bear our darling child
Grows stronger every day.”
“For what do they mean?” maintained the child,
“For I saw two cripples to-day,
And one of them said he had ‘fought for the blue,’
The other had ‘fought for the gray.’

“The one of the blue had lost a leg,
And the other had but one arm,
And both seemed worn and weary and sad,
Yet their greeting was kind and warm,
They told of the battles in days gone by
Till it made my blood run chill,
The leg was lost in the Wilderness fight
And the arm on Malvern Hill.

“They sat on the stone by the farmyard gate
And talked for an hour or more,
Till their eyes grew bright and their hearts seemed warm
With fighting their battles o’er;
And parted at last with a friendly grasp,
In a kindly, brotherly way,
Each asking God to speed the time
Uniting the blue and the gray.”

Then the mother thought of other days,
Two stalwart boys from her riven;
How they’d knelt at her side, and, lisping, prayed:
“Our Father, who art in heaven;”
How one wore the gray and the other the blue,
How they passed away from sight
And had gone to the land where gray and blue
Merge in tints of celestial light.

And she answered her darling with golden hair,
While her heart was sorely wrung
With thoughts awakened in that sad hour
By her innocent, prattling tongue;
“The blue and the gray are the colors of God;
They are seen in the sky at even,
And many a noble, gallant soul
Has found them passports to heaven.”

- Author Unknown

Reproductive Rights Bill Threatens Again

May 29th, 2011, Promulgated by Hopefull

In at least some churches this weekend, and on very short notice, people were told that the Reproductive Rights Bill will be rearing its ugly head again THIS WEEK, on Ascension Thursday to be exact.  June 2 is the day for the Committee vote in the Assembly to bring this to the floor for vote, and now is the time to call / fax / email our Assembly representatives with our objections.  We signed petitions at church this morning, and that is good, but hopefully those who can do even more will do so.  This  info was confirmed in an email from Rochester Area Right-to-Life. 

Why is it important to oppose this bill?  Because it would make abortion a “fundamental right” up to and through the 9th month of pregnancy.  It is essentially permission for murder at birth.  It also will put even more of a sinful burden on Catholic hospitals and Catholic doctors.

Please contact your NYS Assembly Representative at his/her Albany or local office and say:  “Please oppose the Reproductive Health Act.  It is harmful to women.”    Remember that not all the representatives are pro-abortion, and courtesy as well as clarity matter.  If it does come out of committee, we will need to go back to those same people to ask them to oppose it on the Assembly floor.  Credibility and persistence are key.   We need to convince them that there is considerable opposition to the bill.  God bless you for anything you can do!

 

 

You Might Not Have a Funeral Mass When You Die…

May 29th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

From All Saints parish in Corning:

The fruit of Bishop Clark’s tenure.

$hepherds $hearing $heep: Part 8: Case cont’d: “Abuse and/or Defamation”

May 29th, 2011, Promulgated by Diane Harris
This entry is part 8 of 9 in the series $hepherds $hearing $heep

This is part of the continuing saga recounted to Mr. Cuomo in the letter given to him in August 2010 when he was State Attorney General and running for Governor.  The following is the final part of the “Case of St. Mary’s Rushville” which began in Part 3 and was appended to his letter in its entirety.  (As a reminder, anything in blue was added after the letter was given to Mr. Cuomo, but is added for the sake of clarification to current readers.)  The pastor mentioned is Father Robert Ring.

Intimidation, Verbal Abuse and Defamation:  This has been typical of the pastor’s style, which is intimidating and sarcastic, controlling people from asking too much or getting too involved.  I realize this may seem far afield from the financial and NYS Religious Corporation Law, but I am sure you are aware that under Sarbanes Oxley (federal financial legislation which would be well-known to Mr. Cuomo) much attention has been given to the effect of an intimidating, hostile environment on the loss of quality in financial reporting, caused by reluctance to elevate or dispute relevant issues.  Therefore, I mention specifically just a few of the acts of hostility, experienced or witnessed. 

For example,

  • one gentleman who was on a committee with me said that Fr. Emo (see above and prior Zeal posts) had been convicted of sexual abuse in another case, but the pastor denied it.  That gentleman sent me an email to prove it and I copied it to the pastor as proof, who threatened that man with a lawsuit for “slander” [against himself, the pastor!]  The man left the committee and his parish (St. Jan’s)
  • In another situation, an elderly and very reliable parishioner who was one of the people who counted collections faithfully remarked that the headcount [reported by the usher] looked higher than she felt had been present that day.  The pastor heard from others about her remark, telephoned her and denigrated her, and also made a joking remark at her expense at another parish’s meeting, all causing the lady to no longer count.  So, a high quality, reliable financial counting person was replaced by more of the pastor’s personal selections.  Since then, I have personally seen a number of errors made, mis-crediting donations between St. Mary and St. Theresa. 
  • I too have been an object of the pastor’s sarcasm and denigration, and subjected to his intimidating tactics.  At one point, when I was parish council chair, I asked for and received data directly from him on financial status among parishes for the purpose of analyzing and posting on the parish forum.  Within hours of the posting, the pastor said he could “no longer trust” me, and dismissed me from Parish Council.  I still believe it was a ruse to remove opposition to the closing of St. Mary.
  • I witnessed the pastor’s accusing a woman in another parish of lying when I knew and I believe he knew she had not lied.  But she was bringing together a group of parishioners seeking better alternatives than the planning team was presenting.  Therefore, her credibility was damaged with another group of people, and she wasn’t present to defend herself.
  • The pastor held a meeting between parish councils and the planning team and invited input in November 2005.  Another council member and I provided 11 pages of planning input.  The following Sunday the pastor stood in the pulpit and denounced our input as a “pack of lies.”  That was untrue.  He wrote an apology he wanted us to send to the planning group.  We refused.
  • In violation of Catholic Church Canon Law, the pastor interfered with the rights of parishioners to meet and discuss the pastoral planning work, to form our opinions without pressure from him, and to do the best job possible for other parishioners.  Both the Concerned Parishioners of St. Mary and the Friends of St. Januarius were treated this way.
  • After presenting to the pastor a draft complaint to the Chancellor about the pastor’s behavior, he changed the locks, removed me from all ministries and threatened to do more.  He did not comment on the draft, which was transformed into a complaint to the Bishop in June 2006.
  • The pastor’s persistent hostility has modeled the same for his staff and for some of his parishioner supporters, so that to some inquiries on financial matters I have been met with email response such as “Cool your jets” and an outright refusal by the business manager to answer questions; in other cases hostile email and letters, some of a threatening nature, have been received with his apparent “blessing.”  It only shows the pressure within this not-for profit entity against elevating issues of concern, and illustrates the need not to allow the church to become the last bastion of permitted insult and abuse. 

Defamation Lawsuit Against The Pastor:  Finally, in 2007 after all efforts with the pastor and with the Chancellor and Bishop of the Rochester Diocese failed, I initiated a defamation lawsuit against the pastor (Monroe County Index No. 5797-07).  Long delays by the Diocese in even answering my complaint caused many events to expire under the statute of limitations but, nevertheless I pursued it as a per se defamation suit, against the pastor and against the Diocese for failure to supervise him. [Mr. Cuomo, as a lawyer, would know what "per se" means; i.e. that the defamation was so egregious that I would not have to prove injury to health or prove financial damages.]  The case was not heard, as the judge determined it did not rise to the level of “per se” and that I would need to prove financial or health damages, and dismissed the case without prejudice, giving me 6 months to appeal.  [An important point here, that again Mr. Cuomo as a lawyer would have understood, is that by the judge's stating "without prejudice" the judge was NOT saying I hadn't been defamed, only that I would need to have health or financial damage too.]   I did not appeal, as neither my finances nor my health were damaged.  I mention this in the interest of full disclosure.  Among my claims were that the pastor had slandered and libeled me, and I provided backup for all those claims, which is a matter of record. 

After I let the time for appeal expire (June 2008) thenthe diocese decided that it would assess St. Mary Rushville (another way to move money out of the Treasury, we believe) “charges” which they say were not covered by insurance for the Diocese’s and/or the pastor’s defense of my suit against them. (The Diocese had been included as a party for failure to properly supervise its employee, Fr. Bob Ring.)  The charge they levied against St. Mary was about $19,000 yet St. Mary was not even a party to the action.  St. Mary was neither plaintiff nor defendant, and had and has no ability to supervise or to discipline the pastor.  Eventually, on protest, the Diocese dropped the charge to about $14,000.  The 2009 and 2010 (ended June 30) financial report has not been issued yet, so we can’t verify what actually was charged.  But St. Mary had to pay for a personal lawsuit against the pastor, for his personal behavior, when the parish had no role, which of course seems unfair to most parishioners.  As we ask “why” it appears that such a tactic is at least partially intended (or at least has the result) to intimidate others from bringing lawsuits.  If such intimidation were to prevent a parent from bringing suit on behalf of a molested child, it would be a very wrong signal to send, to require hurting one’s own parish in order to protect oneself or family.

CONCLUSION:  All these abuses within one parish, with one pastor, over just a few years, experienced by a number of different people, show how those who know how to “manage” the law in the not-for-profit area of religious corporations can deeply affect the lives of individuals and communities.  Very few of these actions seem to be an outgrowth of the true not-for-profit purposes.  And it is believed if there were more state oversight over the financial and governance areas, the net result would even be good for the church, and give people comfort that they can be treated fairly and be safe.  Even appeals, by many parishes, all the way to Rome in accordance with approved Church process and Canon Law, seem to have fallen on deaf ears.  Please lead a reform of the NYS Religious Corporation Law.

Furthermore, in the process of researching such matters, I suggest that due to the small size and self-contained nature of these issues at St. Mary Rushville, over a prolonged period in OLOL and in the Diocese of Rochester, St. Mary would make an excellent further case study for reformation, and I personally pledge all possible cooperation to assist with your further analysis and consideration.

Sincerely,

Diane C. Harris

The above ends the text of the mailing to Mr. Cuomo, and is only the tip of the iceberg of what went on in OLOL, and only on finance-related matters.  But finance is an important diagnostic of the state of openness, transparency, responsibility in any not-for-profit, which benefits from a plethora of  tax exemptions, at tax-payer expense. 

When I first posted the letter to Mr. Cuomo, some thought I wanted government interference in the Church.  I DO NOT!  What I want is for the Church management, and any not-for-profit, to adhere to the law, and for that law to be enforced.  I do not believe churches should be above reasonable and just civil law, nor should  the people who run them. 

Future posts on the $$$ thread will unwrap even more details on certain events, in those posts sticking  to the finance and finance related areas.

Here a Priestess, There a Priestess

May 28th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

Spiritus Christi, a schismatic community in Rochester which broke away from the Catholic Church in 1998-9, is about to celebrate the pretend ordination of another one of its members. Patti LaRosa, a longtime parishioner of Spiritus who was pretend ordained to the diaconate last year, will be pretend ordained a ‘c’atholic priestess on June 4th in Catonsville, Maryland by pretend bishop Andrea Johnson. Her pretend ordination is being conducted by the organization Roman ‘c’atholic Womanpriests.

Ms. LaRosa is the fourth woman from Spiritus to travel the path of fake ordination. The others have been (in order): Mary Ramerman, Denise Donato, and Chava Redonnet. As we reported back in April, Church of the Assumption’s music director, Mary Van Houten, may soon join the ranks of these schismatics.

To date, no Spiritus Christi men have been illicitly ordained from this community.

It Can Happen Here

May 28th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

The Diocese of Lincoln, a diocese with less than 100,000 Catholics, has more than 40 seminarians presently in formation.

Behold the fruit of orthodoxy!

A Strange Question to Ask

May 27th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

From the St. Mary of the Assumption bulletin:

Does the pastoral administrator expect parishioners to answer  ‘no’ or what?

Changing Appearances to Communicate to Different People

May 27th, 2011, Promulgated by Bernie

From the New Liturgical Movement  here

by David Clayton

When depicting Christ or Our Lady one always has to consider their individual characterics (handed down to us by tradition); but at the same time the artist will always consider modifying the appearance so that those who are likely to see the painting will identify with Him or her. Here are some paintings by Chinese Christians …    

 Christ is the Everyman, the model for all humanity. When He (or indeed Our Lady and the saints) are painted, the image must also participate in a model of humanity that the audience can relate to. All sacred art is a balance of the general and the particular. If those who are going to see the painting are going to be almost exclusively …

Read more

How do we know if a proposed liturgical image is Catholic? Part III

May 27th, 2011, Promulgated by Bernie

Previously Part I and Part II

In this third post in the series I would like to offer for your consideration a third standard that I think could be used to evaluate how Catholic a proposed sacred image might be. Denis R. McNamara’s book Catholic Church Architecture and the Spirit of the Liturgy, especially Part IV, informed much of what I express here. The Spirit of the Liturgy by Pope Benedict (then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger) also served as a reference.

Saints should look sanctified

In order for an image to qualify for use in the Catholic liturgy it must look sanctified or transfigured.

(left) A "transfigured" image of Blessed Mother Teresa on a street in Skopje, Macedonia; 2. (right) A realistic sculpture of Mother in a church nave in Venice (island of Burano), Italy. To my way of thinking the transfiured image on the left is more appropriate for the church than the one on the right even though the realistic image is obviously well crafted and "noble."

In general we might say that this means that sacred images should not be realistic. Realism suggests that the subject still exists in temporal time or at least calls to mind the saint’s former earthly state in a fallen and imperfect world. But, the saints are now in heaven and their earthly bodies have been sanctified or glorified. The bodies of the saints have been permanently transfigured as our Lord was transfigured on Mt. Tabor. Think, for example, of our Lord’s appearances to His disciples following His resurrection. His body was glorified so that they did not, at first, recognize Him. They see a man, but they do not recognize Jesus. The disciples who met the risen Lord on the road to Emmaus only recognized Him in the breaking of the bread. The vision granted Peter, James and John on Mt. Tabor was a pre-resurrection glimpse of the glorified Lord.

Like our Lord’s body following His resurrection, ours, too, will be glorified in heaven –sanctified and transfigured. This is now the reality for the saints in heaven and so their images that we use in the church building where we celebrate the Divine Liturgy need to reflect and communicate that truth.

Given this transformation of the human body images of the saints and of Christ must, therefore, also be rendered in natural forms –shown with recognizable and believable human shapes. We do not shed our bodies in heaven, we keep them but in a glorified state. Images that are distorted beyond what could be considered reasonably natural should not be displayed in the chancel or nave of the church or, on its exterior facade. Such images defy the truth of the Incarnation in the case of the Lord, and Christian eschatological truth in the case of the saints and seem to apply a purely spiritual existence.

How, then, do artists paint or sculpt human images to look sanctified, and how can they represent both past, present and future events as transformed into sacred time?

Abstraction and stylization

Normally, to indicate a spiritual dimension, artists abstract the human form. They fashion a human shape by emphasizing what is essential to the human form and chisel away non-essential or realistic details. The concept is akin to Plato’s theory of ideal Forms. It is an overall principle of design followed by artists no matter whether the subject is a saint, landscape or narrative scene. Abstracted forms suggest a purer, more ideal existence, free of imperfections and weaknesses, including moral weakness. If the subject is a particular saint or landscape then the artist strives to get down to the essential form or most important aspects or qualities of that particular person, landscape or narrative scene. In the process the artist attempts some distortion of shapes, space, and lighting and so on in order to communicate a slightly different and spiritual dimension that contradicts to a certain extent our experiences of the physical world.

3. Door jamb sculptures of the Royal Portal of Chartres Cathedral, France, 1145-55. Elongation is a typical way to enhance the spiritual or other-worldly expression of images. Here the figures also become part of the achitecture itself.

So, according to this standard, we should expect images proposed for sacred use to be natural in appearance and yet not be realistic. We should examine a proposed work to see if we can determine in what ways the artist has abstracted the figure or landscape or narrative in order to reveal its essential characteristics or qualities.

Likewise, however, we must be prepared to reject works that are so greatly abstracted or distorted as to deny to the saint or Christ a believable human form. Such images often appear to be like insects or alien space creatures, anything but truly human. It seems popular today to abstract to the point of over-spiritualizing which contradicts the basic truth that the person had a physical body and that that very same body still exists, but now in glorified form.  Some modern images often look merely decorative or symbolic which stresses a kind of cheap generic humanity.

4. The modern crossing altar of Notre Dame Cathedral, Paris, France. Human shapes radically abstracted and used symbolically or as mere decoration; 5. Crucifix in a church in Assy, France, sculpted by Germaine Richier. The artist tellingly explained that "There is no face because God is the spirit and faceless." The bishop decided that it was a "caricature representing nothing" and had it removed. A new bishop had it returned.

6. A modern icon in a traditional Eastern style.

Traditional Byzantine icons are good examples of a style that has successfully merged for hundreds of years the natural with the spiritual. The artists in the Eastern Churches generally stay within those or similar stylistic boundaries and so it is relatively easy to notice when an artist breaks with tradition. But, the Western Church has chosen a different route, one that allows for greater variety and innovation. That has had its stunning successes but also unfortunate failures. I think it would be at least a little easier and safer if we in the West could at least keep this third standard in mind when we instruct artists on what we want, and then hold them to it.

Stressing naturalism and minimizing realism is only one way to attain the look of a transfigured image. There is, admittedly, plenty of room for disagreements, and we could certainly find examples that work well and yet contradict the standard I have outlined. In the next post, then, I work like to stay on this third standard and describe a few other ways artists suggest a spiritual or other-worldly existence even if the artist has not obviously chosen naturalism over realism in his rendering of the main subject.

…………………………………………………………………………

Picture Sources

1.  http://www.friendsofmacedonia.com/node/3

2.  Bernie

4.  Live Rural NL

5.  TIME Magazine ~ 23 April 1951

Book References and Recommendations 

 

Catholic Church Architecture and the Spirit of the Liturgy, Denis R. McNamara, (Chicago, Hillenbrand Books, 2009)

 

 The Spirit of the Liturgy, Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, (San Francisco, Ignatius Press, 2000)

John Allen Jr. speaks to Rochester’s Ministerium

May 27th, 2011, Promulgated by Ben Anderson

As previously reported by Mike, the nearly ubiquitous John L. Allen, Jr. sadly still writing for the ultra-liberal dissenting National Catholic Reporter (as Fr Z says) was here in Rochester this week addressing the Ministerium.   I’ve cut out some interesting parts of the article on which I have no comment, so be sure to read Mike Latona’s full article at catholiccourier.com.

Disclaimer:  Mr. Allen is obviously MUCH more informed about global Catholicism than I and MUCH more educated about Catholicism in general.   So please don’t mistake my comments to be a correction to his overall message.  My comments are meant to offer perspective for those of us living within the Diocese of Rochester.

HENRIETTA — John L. Allen Jr. is out to clear up some widely held, yet mistaken beliefs among United States Catholics.

He shies away from the term “polarization” because that inspires the terms “left” and “right,” when in fact divisions in today’s church are more complex.

Well, sure.  However there is a great chasm between the hermeneutic of rupture and the hermeneutic of continuity.  Much of the “more complex” issues are downstream from that major distinction.  Though not absolute, I think we could start with a pretty big distinction between those who wish to change the Church and those who submit fully to her teachings.  This integral issue actually seems quite simple to me.

And, he said a bishop alone cannot be expected to shape any significant trends.

But he certainly can stifle trends.  He has a significant voice and significant power.  And beyond that, he controls the education (SBSTM) and appointment of many of our diocesan leaders, who in turn shape the minds of parishioners. Other trends outside his control are Catholic Radio, EWTN, the Pope’s voice, and this blog.  All of these “other” influences are quite new and I believe bear the fruits of the Holy Spirit.  And indeed there are forces outside the Church which shape trends inside the Church as well.

These were among the viewpoints Allen shared as part of his keynote address, “The Future Church,” at the seventh-annual Gathering of the Ministerium on May 12 at the DoubleTree Hotel. Approximately 400 pastoral ministers from across the Diocese of Rochester attended. [wow!]


Allen said U.S. Catholics have not only become more ethnically diverse, but also are splintered into many causes. Whereas he said polarized Catholics are commonly depicted as being either liberal or conservative, he prefers the term “tribalization” over “polarization.” Examples of so-called tribes are pro-life groups, peace-and-justice advocates, liturgical traditionalists and feminists.
“Each of these tribes tends to move in their own little world. They have profoundly different senses of what is happening in the world,” Allen said.

Let’s break down the groups he mentioned…

Pro-Life
Being pro-life is non-negotiable.  If you are not pro-life, then you are rejecting a core teaching of the Church and endangering your soul.  Obviously, some people are more involved in the cause than others.  Not everyone spends their weekends praying outside of abortion clinics and that’s OK.  We all have different callings.  I’ve never heard a pro-lifer coerce someone into joining them with a line like, “well, you’re ignoring the Gospel message if you don’t come to our rally.”  However, we should all be supportive of the cause in whatever way we feel called.  We are not allowed to be unsupportive.

Peace and Justice Advocates
Let’s be honest – this “cause” is often extremely pushy of the social welfare state.  Many of these people pretend that their causes are non-negotiable, when in fact they are.   If you want to spend your free time passing out petitions to increase taxes and further enable the culture of the poor – that’s cool with me.  I won’t agree and I won’t participate, but I certainly won’t let it cause divisions between me and you as Christian brothers and sisters.  I have yet to meet anyone from the pro-life or liturgical traditionalist camp who would say otherwise.  I might, however, get upset when “peace-and-justice” advocates present their negotiable positions as if they are official teachings of the Church.  Just look at what these “expert” theologians had to say about House Speaker Boehner.   Fortunately, we are finally starting to see the hierarchy in the US take note of the legitimacy of various positions.

Allow me to also give the disclaimer that I don’t like the term “peace-and-justice” advocates.  Certainly we are all called to be such and I don’t want to mislead others into thinking that peace and justice aren’t important.  However, given the particular place and time we live in, the most grave offense to peace and justice is the murder of innocent children.   Let’s break down how many people are killed each year in the US due to a lack of peace or justice.  How many criminals have been executed in the US in the last 50 years?  How many poor people have died of starvation?  How many have been killed in the womb?  The answer to the first 2 questions is a handful.  The answer to the last is millions.  According to the principle of proportionality, where would our time be better spent?

Liturgical Traditionalists
As a convert I always find it funny when Catholics are labeled as traditionalists.  hmmm – Catholicism is all about tradition, n’est-ce pas?  All Catholics are in a sense liturgical traditionalists.  That doesn’t mean we are required to do everything exactly as it was done in 1950.  But it does mean that we should have great respect for our Catholic patrimony.  That said, I think we all know what he’s getting at.  I find this labeling to be somewhat of a straw man and perhaps even pejorative.  I would bet that for many who attended this conference, Cleansing Fire would fit the bill for this label.  Again, I don’t think this matter is quite as complex as some would make it out to be.  There are rubrics for the mass.  They should be followed.  If they are not, then people have a legitimate right to complain.  Also, people have a legitimate right to have differing opinions on things that are licit.  Some people will argue against the priest facing the people.  There’s nothing wrong with voicing that opinion as long as you acknowledge that according to the rubrics we have today, it is licit and valid for a priest to do so.  The number of people who go overboard in their “liturgical traditionalism”  is much smaller than the progressives try to make it out.  They attempt to label anyone who thinks liturgical rubrics ought to be followed as rad-trads.

Feminists
Authentic feminism is a good thing, but the term is almost always used to represent ideas that are not in accord with Church teaching.  So, we’re back to the simple division of those who accept the teachings of the Church and those who don’t.  If you want to learn more about feminism, I suggest searching Catholic Answers’ radio archive.

He observed that not surprisingly, tribalization has hindered U.S. Catholics’ ability to come together as church.

I’m not sure I buy this.  I have yet to meet two people from different “tribes” who both accept the teachings of the Church and yet are unable to “come together as church”.  The inability to come together as church stems from the rejection of Church teaching.  In such a case, it is the group denying Church teaching who has hindered the relationship – not the other way around.

Allen said he supports the Common Ground Initiative, begun in 1996 to promote respectful dialogue among Catholics despite differing perspectives — “but more than 15 years after it was launched, we’re more divided than we were.”

Never heard of CGI, but I haven’t been Catholic for all that long.  Common ground is a good thing – I just hope our common ground is a firm belief in the teachings of the Church.

Allen reasoned that perhaps not enough Catholics have really cared to see eye-to-eye: “We all know 12-step programs don’t work for people who don’t want the help.” However, he emphasized that Catholics must strive to unite in order to withstand the growing influence of secularism and other religious denominations. One way to achieve this, he suggested, is not to view differing ideological camps in an either-or way but by “instead understanding the legitimate concerns of their positions” without passing quick judgment.

Let’s take Cleansing Fire as an example.  I think many progressives would try to say that we are quick to pass judgment and intolerant of different ideological camps.  However, that claim is totally without merit.  We are quite the mixed bag here.  We have people from all over the spectrum (ie the legitimate Catholic spectrum – limited to staying w/in the bounds of Church teaching).  One thing we all seem to unite on is standing firm with Holy Mother Church.

He added that Catholics need to focus on strengthening ties at the grassroots level, stating that “creative change in the church rarely originates with the bishop.”

indeed – sometimes creative change goes viral :-)

This remark was made in response to the observation made during a question-and-answer session that Bishop Matthew H. Clark is due to retire in 2012. The keynoter said anyone expecting immediate and significant upheaval under Bishop Clark’s successor will likely discover otherwise.

How I would have loved to hear that question.  I find Allen’s response difficult to believe.  I suppose it depends on what you mean by upheaval.  If you mean that the DOR will immediately begin buying up all the churches she sold off, that mass attendance will sky-rocket, and that all of the diocese’s problems will go away, then obviously I’d agree with him.  However, if you mean that many people at SBSTM (and elsewhere w/in the diocese) will be dismissed from their positions, women “pastors” will be forced to stop playing priest, and orthodox doctrines will be allowed to be taught from the pulpit w/out repercussions, then I think this is more than a legitimate possibility.  There have been several examples of quick change after progressive bishops were replaced by much more solid leaders.  DrK posted a little while back about what Bishop Robert Finn accomplished in just his first week as bishop of Kansas City-St. Josph.  Rich Leonardi has also posted a few times concerning the many positive changes taking place within the Archdiocese of Cincinnati since the new bishop arrived.

Thus concludes my analysis of Latona’s article on Allen’s visit to Rochester.

Here’s a few more links of interest in regards to Allen:

A Recent Speech by Allen at Kansas University
(perhaps quite similar to the speech he gave to the Ministerium)

LifeSiteNews: John Allen’s strategy for legitimizing Catholic dissent (provides some insight into the Common Ground Initiative):

The Allen Strategy hearkens back to the 1990s, when Chicago’s Cardinal Bernardin sought to co-opt orthodox Catholics with the “common ground” and “seamless garment” initiatives. His apparent intent was to induce the faithful to compromise with liberal dissenters in order to promote “unity” in the Church. Inevitably he failed, although the Common Ground Project maintains a post-mortem presence at Chicago’s Catholic Theological Union.

“Top Nine Reasons why Baseball is to Sports what Catholicism is to Religion.” (w/ Fr. Z’s commentary)

And speaking of tribalism, I think this joke is fitting (hat tip gadel)

A Franciscan and Jesuit were debating which order was the greatest. So, they decided to ask for a sign from God. This is what they received falling down from heaven:

My sons,

Please stop bickering about such trivial matters,

GOD, O.P.

Bishop Clark Closes St. Michael School in Newark

May 26th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

From YNN comes the following DoR press release:

“Based on recommendations from the leaders at St. Michael’s Church and the Diocese of Rochester Catholic School Board, Bishop Clark has made the decision to close St. Michael School in Newark at the end of the current academic year. This decision was not made lightly and comes after careful consideration and much prayer.

We were heartened to see the strong community support that St. Michael received in its effort to stay open and viable. Unfortunately, despite all of their efforts, the steady decline in enrollment has continued over the last several years. The parish can no longer continue to incur considerable debt to operate the school.

We believe strongly in the virtues of a Catholic education and will continue to do all we can to support the remaining schools across the Diocese of Rochester.”

Close, close, close.

What is going to happen to the $71,000+ raised so far to keep the school open? I hope the diocese will return this money in full to its respective donors.

Please pray that the students who attend St. Michael will find another place to receive a Catholic education.

Solemn Vespers at St. Anne Church – Rochester, NY

May 26th, 2011, Promulgated by Gen

Here is a video of the recent Solemn Vespers service held at St. Anne Church on May 22. It certainly looks and sounds like an amazing event, one which I hope to see emulated in other parishes around the Diocese. Remember, the laity are called by the Church to participate fully in Her Liturgy of the Hours (or Divine Office, etc.) – by praying Vespers, or Lauds, or any of the other hours of the Office, you are linking yourself, not only to the entire Church on Earth, but the Church in Heaven as well.

(Video courtesy of Bernie.)

Month of Resignations

May 25th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

Three U.S. bishops will reach the retirement age of 75 this coming month and be required by Canon Law to submit their resignation to the Holy Father.

  • Bp. Edward Kmiec, Diocese of Buffalo (June 4th)
  • Abp. George Niederauer, Archdiocese of San Francisco (June 14th)

and everyone’s favorite…

  • Bp. Donald Trautman, Diocese of Erie (June 24th)

There are presently six [five] dioceses without a bishop: Rapid City, Fresno, Salina, Baker, Pensacola-Tallahassee, and Steubenville.

Another six have bishops serving past 75: Savannah, Philadelphia, Manchester, Lincoln, Bismark, and Rockford.

After these three bishops submit their resignation in June, there will be seven more bishops to resign before Bishop Clark turns 75 next July.

More Bold Dissent from the NCReporter

May 25th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

Once again, this reeking pile of dog feces is made available to our discerners at Becket Hall by the Diocese of Rochester:

“Whether the papal treatment of Morris was fair or just is one matter — this paper thinks it was not. The deeper question, going beyond individual persons and cases, is whether the church is experiencing what the Australian bishop and many theologians in recent decades have described as “creeping infallibility.”

At issue fundamentally is whether John Paul, in his 1994 apostolic letter, Ordinatio Sacerdotalis (“Priestly Ordination”), intended to (or actually did) lay out an infallible teaching when he said, “I declare that the church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the church’s faithful.”

John Paul did not formally pronounce the teaching ex cathedra (speaking from the chair of Peter) or say he was teaching infallibly in his declaration.

The doctrinal congregation can make many definitive decisions regarding church doctrine and life. It is beyond its authority to determine which church teachings are infallible and which are not. Only a pope clearly speaking ex cathedra or an ecumenical council of the world’s bishops can determine that.

“Creeping infallibility” is precisely what is at issue here — a papal document that made no claim to infallibility raised to the level of infallibility by a Vatican congregation’s statement that has no competence to make such a determination, and now almost casually described as infallible in a disciplinary letter to a bishop by the current pope.”

The teaching that men alone are ordained priests is indeed infallible, as it is part of the deposit of faith and has been set forth by the ordinary magisterium. The Holy Father commanded that this teaching be definitively held. To remove any doubt whatsoever, the prefect of the CDF (who happens to be our current Pope) confirmed the Holy Father’s intentions in a responsum ad dubium. This response was given with the approval of the Holy Father, so there can be no doubt what Pope John Paul II’s intentions were: “This congregation therefore has judged it necessary to dispel the doubts and reservations that have arisen by issuing a responsum ad dubium, which the Holy Father has approved and ordered to be published”.

For an excellent explanation on why this teaching is infallible, read the following article: click here.

Music to Our Ears?

May 25th, 2011, Promulgated by Dr. K

The following comes from Fr. William Laird, pastor of St. Katharine Drexel:

If the chant is any good, and void of “inclusive language,” this could be a great initiative!