Dressing for Holy Mass...

Recently an acquaintance of mine said this:

I think putting an effort into how we dress for Mass is important, because we will be in the presence of God. I almost always try my hardest to try and find something nice to wear, and even though I don't have a closet full of Sunday dresses, I think God knows my heart's intent and my financial situation, and is grateful that I try to look better for Mass than I do for school, cleaning, hanging out, etc. I do get a little upset when I see girls in Mass with short shorts and t-shirts on. Just last Saturday, a girl in front of me was wearing them, and her shirt was tied up in the back so you could just see her lower back. I told her I was going to pull it down to cover it, and I did. There's a difference between dressing immodest and dressing informal. Sometimes, I have to dress informally because I don't have a dress lying around I can wear, but I'll still clean up and look modest. I think the big question here is, how do we implement modest dress in Mass? Have ushers at the doors to verify whether or not someone is dressed suitably for Mass? In that case, it would be like the pharisees kujo alluded to. I also see where he's coming from, because simply saying that people dressed a certain way should not go to Mass and whatnot is a covert reflection on how oneself dresses for Mass, portraying a "pharisee attitude."

My respsonse:

 

No, but I shouldn't go to Mass expecting to see what you described. And I do, well, I did, until I started assisting at a Traditional Latin Mass full time. Now the most immodest thing I will see is a golf shirt on a man and a pair of slacks on a woman, occasionally.

While I understand that not everyone has the wherewithal to have a closet full of Sunday best, the idea is that you do have a Sunday best, so that you can pull it out and wear it on Sunday. I own about 7 suits. That was not always the case. I built that up over time, due to the industry I'm in as well as the desire to look good as well as portray a more formal sense of attire for certain occasions, including Holy Mass. I get picked on about it from my family....my brother is pretty relentless, but then again, he's a lapse Catholic....and often times, I'm in black slacks and a either a button down or a soft collared shirt, because until recently I would wear a cassock most weekends. But nobody knew how I was dressed under the cassock. In the summer, I would often have shorts on, but I can guarantee you that I had dress socks and black shoes on, so that nobody would  know any differently. If I were not in cassock, I would be in collared shirt and slacks or sometimes in a suitcoat and tie, as I said....

Realistically, it must be a grass roots movement and we cannot be afraid to say something. If we are going to stand up for our Catholic Culture, then we have to stand up for our Catholic Culture. Part of that culture is dressing appropriately. Look at the words of Bishop Nickless....as a parting note, I will add this...all through college, I had a very good friend, who used to wear the same outfit to Mass every single Sunday. Why? Because as she said, those were her "Sunday goin' to church clothes"...she wasn't rich, but went to a school where rich kids went. She wasn't being Pharisaical, but I can guarantee you, she had the proper understanding of the importance of looking her best for the King of the Universe, even when most of the rest of her peers were in jeans and t-shirts...

All we have to do as Catholics is make the effort. It isn't hard. But it is a commitment. And that commitment is a good one, because it is done for the Greater Glory of God and not to fit in or to be trendy or to facilitate ease of the moment.

The words of Bishop R. Walker Nickless:

 

We can be immodest in our dress,trying to be fashionable and trendy. We sometimes wear clothes that are dirty or too revealing and immodest even to Mass. Our casual daily summer attire is not appropriate for this great celebration of our faith. Coming to Mass should always be special and we need to dress appropriately for this special time of worship.In our reverence for Christ our Lord,and in our respect for one another,we must not settle for the vice of immodesty as the norm. The virtues of humility and modesty are gifts of the Holy Spirit,part of what we celebrate this Sunday on the Solemnity of Pentecost. Let us be grateful for these gifts and all the gifts of the Holy Spirit. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are rich blessings;let us use them always for the greater honor and glory of God.

source

The GIRM is changing too..

A recent post from Fr. Z that I think is important to note...

When the new English translation of the Roman Missal is released, it will sport a new translation of the GIRM, the General Institution/Instruction of the Roman Missal. There are, of course, adaptations for the USA and other Anglophone regions.

As it happens, the Congregation for Divine Worship has … tweaked some items. I am sure this was to harmonize the language of the GIRM with the language of the rest of the Roman Missal. However, tweaks may have been tweaked for other reasons.

For example, take a look at GIRM 160 for the USA. The Latin is found on the USCCB website.

LATIN:
… Fideles communicant genuflexi vel stantes, prout Conferentia Episcoporum statuerit. Cum autem stantes communicant, commendatur ut debitam reverentiam, ab iisdem normis statuendam, ante susceptionem Sacramenti faciant.

http://www.wdtprs.com/images2/11_06_24_First_Communion.jpgOLDER USA ADAPTATION VERSION:
… The norm for reception of Holy Communion in the dioceses of the United States is standing. Communicants should not be denied Holy Communion because they kneel. Rather, such instances should be addressed pastorally, by providing the faithful with proper catechesis on the reasons for this norm.

NEWER USA ADAPTATION VERSION:
… The norm established for the Dioceses of the United States of America is that Holy Communion is to be received standing, unless an individual member of the faithful wishes to receive Communion while kneeling (Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, Instruction, Redemptionis Sacramentum, March 25, 2004, no. 91).

The rest of GIRM 160 remains as it was.

There is no mention of addressing the instances “pastorally” or giving “properly catechizing” people who kneel to receive their GOD.

In other words, when people kneel to receive Almighty GOD, priests and other ministers are to give Communion to the person and keep their mouths shut

source

This means I will never have to justify kneeling to receive Our Lord ever again....if I happen to be at a Novus Ordo Mass. Do you know how liberating that feels?

Authenticity and Sacred Music

So, I was in a discussion recently about music and the Mass...

Here is the question at hand...

Hmm so when does Authenticity end up being judged by laity though? I have heard plenty of non-traditional music played in such a way that would outshine chant (not speaking from personal preference). And when you get down with the intention all the music during the Mass is meant to elevate persons into worship of the Eucharist, so as long as the music is that means to elevate those persons in Worship then what is the quandary? I am not trying to digress this into a 'do whatever that works and makes you happy', but if the purpose is to Praise God during the Mass, then if the songs are done properly and kept in mind of the rubrics then why even protest?

And for the record, it's easy to assent when your preference is for this sort of music [Andy]. For those of us that don't it is easier said then done.

Sidenote to all of this, while we worry about all the externals....the intention should be called into question considering pure intention is much more valid then the 'form' things take. Excuse me if I am going off, but I tend to rely on my own mind/knowledge then other things at least in conversation such as this.

My repsonse to this is the following...

Authenticity is NEVER judged by the laity. Authenticity is a matter for the Church to decide and to catechize the faithful on. Outside of that, we must simply trust in the Church. But when her members obfuscate the meanings, then we must take issue. We simply must. And when we get to intention, yes....but the intention is not ours, it is the Church's. We are to accept that and learn from that. The Mass does not belong to any one person, but to assume that the music should appeal to one in particular, then one ceases to have participatio actuosa and simply have pariticipatio activa. That is never good. There is no quandry, if one simply does what the Church asks, then one is clear in his intention. Praise and worship is not suited to the Mass. It never has been and it never will be. Look at the Church's intetntion in the documents below and one will see a whole lot written about Sacred music and nothing written about praise and worship. Properly speaking, Gregorian Chant raises one most perfectly in the Mass....so that is what should be sung.

While I do agree with this reasoning, I don't agree with it because it is my personal opinion or because I hate praise and worship. I agree because the Church says it is what we should be doing....I actually like praise and worship music as long as it fits with Catholic thinking. Heck, my friend Jim is one of my favorite guitarists, but I will argue with him until the day that he dies (or me, whoever goes first) that it isn't apt for Mass.

But, to be subjected to something inferior for 40+ years now, while being told that it is the way things should be done....that is not authentic. The St. Louis Jesuits, Fr. J. Michael Joncas, Marty Haugen and David Haas, among others have misinterpreted the meaning of sacred music and hi-jacked our musical heritage. But, by and large, that is all we've been able to hear at Mass, so please don't tell me that it has been easy supporting this stuff....also, I essentially was blackballed from Campus Ministry in college for holding this line....this has NOT been easy for me....not one bit. I support it, because it is authentic. I oppose the other side, because it is innovative. There is no room for innovation in the Church.

Here are the pertinent documents on Sacred Music in the last 100 years or so...

Tra Le Sollecitudini
Musicae Sacrae Disciplina
De Musica Sacra
Musicam Sacram
Voluntatis obsequens

Setting the Record Straight....

So, perhaps this is just me figuring out a way to vent and doing so, but it's my blog right?  So I have every right to vent, right?  Good.  I'm going to....I will preface this and say two things...

1.  No names will be used, this isn't about one particular person, but a mindset.
2.  I hold no animosity.  I'm hurt and I'm upset about the situation, but that doesn't mean that I hold ill will.  I don't.  I think they do though...and that is part of what I'm going to address...regardless, I wanted to get that out there...

A little backstory...

I came across a Catholic website in mid 2004.  I lurked it for awhile and eventually thought I would join, so I did.  I quickly gained a reputation for being both orthodox and a straight shooter.  I didn't mince words and I didn't wax poetic.  It wasn't/isn't my style and waxing poetic didn't/doesn't make much sense either.  As time passed, I eventually was "tagged" a Church Scholar on this site, based upon my knowledge and my education.  I took the role very seriously and I was honored that I was trusted with a "tag."

After about 3 years and 6500 posts on this site, I decided I needed a break.  I was moving back to Iowa and I was also making a transition in my understanding of Catholic thought.  I was moving from a mainstream Catholic to a traditional Catholic.  That matured over the next 4 years and eventually I made the move to being a full time "traddy."

Also during that time I lost touch with a very dear and close friend of mine who was also part of the site.  He and I went into this together with the understanding that we would be trying to promote and support Catholicism, each in our own way.  He is more "charismatic" and I am more "conservative."  Very recently, he and I made amends and our friendship is back on track.

Fast forward to January 2011.  I decide that it is a good time to come back to the site.  There is no reason why I shouldn't and I since I really enjoyed being there I thought I would enjoy coming back.  My interwebz friends would be there and maybe I'd make some new ones...alas....

When I came back, I came back with a sense of honesty and openness about the fact that I had made the move to "tradition."  This was not received well and I was immediately labelled a "radtrad,"  which was incorrect.  I have some sympathies which lie with the SSPX, going so far as planning to assist at their Masses while I was in Chicago.  That never really materialized, so I returned to Iowa and I started assisting at the diocesan TLM again.  But it was too late.

The label stuck and eventually it boiled over to chat on the site one night with a MOD.  I wasn't expecting that, as she and I had been interwebz friends from the beginning, but I pressed on.  Again, those of you who know me, know that I can be a little stubborn.  It came out in this instance.  But I have never nor have I even thought of speaking ill about Holy Mother Church or her teachings, yet I lost my "tag" because I was sympathetic to the SSPX. 

In an effort not to bore anyone, I went through a series of "bannings; "a month here, a week there...eventually I decided to try to really make amends after two things happened...one I was very sarcastic toward the board over a weekend, but I was hurt over the way I was being treated and two, I had the heartfelt reconciliation with the friend explained above.

This finally boiled over a couple of days ago and here is the thread which brought all of this to a head.  My handle is Cam42.

I will now include the email string as it played out...

Andy, at this point, I think it's safe to assume that you and I both know that your suspensions have more to do with your attitude and disruptive behavior than anything else. We don't have to pretend it's about rules anymore. I was not involved with these latest suspensions as I've been busy with other things this past week, but I trust my mods to do the right thing.

The bottom line is this... You can either choose to be a positive, constructive, presence at phatmass, and build up the website --or-- you can continue to be disruptive and negative force, and tear down the website. The choice is yours.

All of the mods agree that we should permanently ban you forever and be done with it. I would like to leave the choice up to you. If you continue your current behavior (please don't play dumb, you know exactly what you're doing--you're a smart guy) I will be left
with no choice. If it's between you and all my mods quitting on me, I'm gonna side with keeping my mods.

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam!

My response was this:

Hey,

I get it that [this MOD] doesn't like me. I get it that I have prolly offended her somehow, but I really don't appreciate her jumping on me at every turn.

I'm trying really hard to rebuild and correct some of the things that have gone wrong....but if I'm going to be blasted for the majority of the positions I hold and the observations I make, I can't operate that way effectively.

Can you please back her off...it is doing nobody any good...and I believe it to be an abuse of her power as a MOD. She's not moderating me, she's trolling me...that ain't kewl...

Thanks. I appreciate it.

The email back was:

Anyway, a lot of people don't like you Andy. 90% of the phorum doesn't like you. I thought that upon your return you were going to make every attempt to fix that. I have to be honest and say that I'm a bit disappointed in your efforts to do this.

To be blunt, your lack of charity is destroying the community. I made a lot of people upset by giving you another chance and took a lot of heat for it. I think I've been very fair. You haven't really given people much reason to trust that I made the right decision, and I must say, have made me regret putting so much trust myself in [my friend's] judgement and recommendation.

I'm sorry if this is harsh. You yourself are an advocate for telling it how it is, so I hope you understand.

Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam!

 To which I responded:

That's fine [admin], I appreciate your honesty....I will now simply back away from [the site]. I think that it's in the best intrest of everyone...you can go ahead an permaban me..you can give whatever reason you like....I won't be returning...

You can delete me from any group that you think I might be part of which has anything to do with phatmass, because I don't want to cause you any more trouble....

I thought maybe I'd be given a fair shake, but the reality is that we both knew it probably wouldn't work...there was too much stacked against me and with little or no outward support from TPTB, I didn't stand a chance....

Thanks for the opportunity though. I'll pray for you.

 Here is the last word from the site about me (well, not the REAL last word, there are still about 4 threads going on about me or based upon my views or hatred of my views):


Regarding Cam42

Now, this would seem to be a great way to send me off and it sounds all nice and charitable, but the reality is, the Admin only told the site half of the story.  He made it seem as if I stormed off and that there was nothing good that could be done except banning me.  And he implied by that post that this is what he did.  As you can see, clearly...THAT IS NOT THE CASE!!!!  I asked to be removed from the forum, so that I would not be tempted to cause anymore strife there.  It was made clear to me that I was not welcome, so I backed away.  As it is, it was presented that I was beamed into another galaxy.

Where is the Charity in that?  See, for the site, Charity is what the MODs and the Admin want it to be, not what it really is.  I will post on true Christian Charity in the near future, but this ain't it.  This is simply a case of we want our ball and you have it, so give it back...I did and now they are saying I never had it.

I am sorry that this turned out the way it did.  I really loved posting there at one point.  But going forward, I will be a very strong opponent of www.phatmass.com.  They, as a site, are self serving and have no clear view on what is and what is not Catholic.  Everything there is based upon subjectiveness and emotion.  And if you are not part of the "in-crowd," then you will be flamebaited and made to seem un-Catholic.

Everything I've posted here, I would post there...and have posted some of it...my final words are these:

I will pray for the souls at www.phatmass.com.  I will pray unceasingly.  I wish them no animosity, but rather I hope they come to see the error of application when it comes to Christian Charity.  Thanks for listening/reading....now back to our regularly scheduled posts...LOL!!!

Vertical v. Horizontal Theology

Here's the issue at hand...and it is glaringly obvious. There is a change in theology with regard to architecture and it serves man and not God. It is the theology the move toward horizontal theology as being primary (as promoted in the second photo) and vertical theology as being secondary (as promoted in the first).

Vertical theology = God as focus
Horizontal theology = Man as focus

The inherent issue is that in theology man is never the end, but rather God is. This is one of the hallmark errors of Protestantism. It is a sort of positivism which invaded Catholic thought after Vatican Council II wherein the communal aspect of worship became the central focus whereas the God-centered became a relegation of the past and "old thinking."

When we see our minds and hearts not drawn upward to God, who is the main recipient of the Mass, but rather to the congregation around us, we find there are theological problems which arise. Who is the focus? What is the aim? Are we serving God with this attitude or are we serving ourselves? These questions are bigger than the architecture, but it is through the architecture that these questions become manifest. This is yet another example of poor catehesis of the faithful. This shows a breakdown in very elementary Systematic Theology which everyone can grasp.

When we look at the two pictures, we see can see the obvious divergence of theological thought. In the first, we see our eyes drawn upward in everything that has to do with the sanctuary...

1. The step up into the sanctuary, through the altar rail, which signifies a separation of the world from the otherworldly
2. The canopies over the pulpit and the cathedra immediately draw our eyes upward
3. The three steps which lead up to the altar itself.
4. The vertical nature of the raredos draws our eyes from the mensa and gradine toward the heavens
5. The painting of the sanctuary draws the eyes upward to look at the ceiling which shows a triangle to represent the Trinity.

Whereas when we look at the second we see:

1. A lack of altar rail which immediately opens the space to the congregation, making the steps up an after thought.
2. The white wash of paint brings the sanctuary down and focuses the eyes on the contrasting furniture (music stand, candlesticks on the floor, celebrant's (sic. presider's) chair. This is a style employed by photographers when they want the subject to be the focus and not the surroundings, they will have a white backdrop with a white floor.....thereby causing focus to be leveled on the subject at hand.
3. The altar is white, which washes out the mensa and creates a focus not looking upward, but rather focusing down on mosaics under the mensa.
4. The tabernacle is lost in a sea of white and removes focus even though it is a gilded brass.
5. The movement of the altar rail behind the altar is an afterthought in looking at the photo and completely lost.
6. The contrasting "banners" or "tippets" point downward further focusing the eyes downward.

If the Mass is first a way to worship God, why was the focus moved from looking upward to looking down at man? It is a shift in theology. It is a shift in view of how we are to take the liturgy of the Church. It is part of the hermeneutic of rupture and inconsistent with Catholic thought.

Horizontal theology is man focused.
Vertical theology is God focused.

Reform or Revolt....the Hermeneutic of Rupture and it's impact on the Mass

This two part video is a very fair and open view about the hermeneutic of rupture.  In order to correct the rupture, we must understand it.  It is just as much the lay man's responsibility as it is the priest's....

About the TLM

A couple of things to remember about about the Traditional Latin Mass and then a bit of advice...from someone who is exclusive....

1. Congrats on taking the first step into a bigger world.

2. When people approach me about assisting at the Traditional Latin Mass, I say this: "Give it three weeks uninterrupted. Engage the Mass, engage the culture, engage the spirituality, with no influence from the Novus Ordo. If at that time you don't fully embrace the Traditional Latin Mass, or have a better understanding of what is going on around you, then move back. This isn't an instruction, this is an expression of a legitimate spirituality...find out from the inside out. Let it wash over you."

3. Don't worry about keeping up. The Mass moves at it's own pace. You worship at your own pace. When you try to keep tabs on the Mass, especially in the beginning, you won't find much in the Mass, because you're focused too much on the participatio activa and not enough on the participatio actuosa. Keeping up will come with time, but that comes because you've learned to sync your worship to the action of the Mass. They are linked, but they are not the same, even in the Novus Ordo.

Think of it this way, one goes to Mass to worship God the Father. That action is completed in the Gift of the Son. And it is made manifest through the Holy Spirit. When one first comes into church, he should place his offerings (spiritual) at the foot of the altar. He then goes to his place and prepares for Holy Mass. When the priest starts the Mass, he gathers all of the offerings and places them on the altar alongside the Sacred Species. As he is offering these oblations the faithful then worship, each at his own pace, to God the Father. Like I said, as time passes and as one gets more comfortable with the sacrifice of the Holy Mass, his prayer will sync up with that action, until then, one shouldn't strive to catch up or to sync up, because that puts undue strain on a very natural action...It is the celebrant's job to minister to us, so we should let him; not try to minister to ourselves or to each other.

So, when you go back the next time, don't worry so much about knowing where the priest is, it will make the experience that much better. I also suggest that people not use a missal or "the little red book" for several weeks, so as to be able to engage participatio actuosa....WHAT the priest is doing is not nearly as important as to WHY the priest is doing what he's doing. The same applies to the Novus Ordo.

Finally, I would offer this bit of advice...embrace the silence of a low Mass. Embrace it and use it. One of the main reasons that the Mass is quiet is so that one can focus his worship as he sees fit. That will change daily, btw. Your offerings are yours. That is what you meditate upon. The big problem with the "new mentality" of Mass is that we have lost this idea of sacred silence. We've been conditioned to think that unless we're doing or saying or singing or acting out something at Mass, we're not worshiping. That is a Protestant ideal. Catholics have always valued silence and solitude. Monks and nuns have taken what is rightly Catholic with regard to her worship and moved it to the extreme. That is what they do, it is an example...not the norm...but we should apply the example as best we can.

Get it yet? The mentality is a little different. That is why I say give it three weeks, uninterrupted. If you do, I think that you'll see a whole new world with regard to the Church. It isn't a different Church, mind you, but it is a different mentality within the Church....and if you don't like it, you can always go back.