The liturgical year is over. What a year it has been. So much for all that. Let us begin again.
With vespers this evening, it’s the start of a new liturgical year.
Always a great time to make some spiritual resolutions – and liturgical ones, Fathers! Read Redemptionis Sacramentum. Read St. Pius V’s De Defectibus. Reflect upon the truth that the rubrics of the liturgy are morally preceptive unless otherwise evident. It’s a cross, to which you conform yourself, in order to have the freedom of the spirit… interior creativity… So. Always wear a chasuble as celebrant – even if you are alone, you are not alone. Wear that amice stuffed away in the back drawer in the sacristy. Heck, wear a maniple. Even a biretta. Yes, it is allowed, during the Novus Ordo. (There is a proper way to use the biretta, of course – you don’t just wear it the whole time… obviously.) People notice these things. They will ask you about it. You will create interest. It will create opportunities for conversations about the liturgy. You can catechize, evangelize, and disciple-ize. Will you create controversy? Sure. “Father is rigid. Father likes to play dress up. Father is an enemy of the Pope. Father makes it all about himself. Father likes novelties. Father loves 1950’s Catholic nostalgia more than he wants to serve The People™.” Okay. It’s the same crowd of 6 or 7 individuals who keep you from preaching that homily you dreamed about giving while in seminary about some hard moral truths that plenty of pewsitters on Sunday would be moved by. It’s what St. Thomas calls “Pharisaical scandal.” Let them go complain about it and write nasty letters to the Bishop about you – they’ve already been doing that anyway! So just resign to it. Try something new this year. Be brave.
Good Stuff in Rome will be sporadic from now on. Sundays I think I will do something a little different.
It’s fine to be conscientious about how we treat the ocean, the forest, the rivers, the soil. It is really important in some places, like small island countries or areas where people live entirely from the work of their hands – small shifts in weather or tampering with the ecosystems there can have really deadly consequences for people.
It IS okay to be interested in “ecology.” It IS good that there is ecclesiastical interest in these things, even though the way that that interest is being expressed (and the frequency and intensity with which it is expressed) is questionable. It really does matter, and it really is worth getting right, especially in certain places where people live on the brink of starvation.
But the sort of panic that populates so many young minds today is not only scientifically dubious at best, even aside from the comical doomsday predictions, but it’s also frequently sinful.
We read from McHugh and Callan in their famous manual the following on the vice of “solicitude”…
“1681. Solicitude.–Another form of spurious prudence is solicitude, that is, an inordinate carefulness about temporal things or about the future. Its sinfulness appears from the following considerations. (a) Our Lord condemns solicitude: “Be not solicitous therefore saying: ‘What shall we eat, or what shall we drink, or wherewith shall we be clothed?’ . . . Be not solicitous for the morrow, for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof” (Matt, vi. 31, 34). (b) Solicitude seeks temporal things without the moderation that reason requires, does not duly esteem the spiritual, and does not confide in Divine Providence. Without any human care God bestows upon man the gift of life itself, provides for the animals and plants, directs the whole inanimate creation, and it is therefore unreasonable to fret and fume over the temporal things of one individual as if God were unable or unwilling to see to them (Matt, vi. 25 sqq.). 1682. Cases of Unlawful Solicitude about Temporalities.–(a) Solicitude is sinful on account of the things sought if one makes temporal things the end of life, as when a person follows religion purely as a business matter, for the sake of the living and worldly advantages this secures. (b) Solicitude is sinful on account of the immoderate desire of obtaining some good, when one pursues the temporal with such avidity that the spiritual is made to suffer, as when a person devotes so much time and thought to business, politics, society or science that religion is more and more set aside in his life: “The cares of this world choked up the word” (Matt., xiii. 22). (c) Solicitude is sinful on account of the immoderate fear of losing a temporal good, when one is deterred from religion by the thought that fidelity to virtue means the sacrifice of the necessaries of life. Examples of this immoderate solicitude are persons who never attend church or contribute to religion, lest they lose time or money, or who practise race-suicide to escape the burden of supporting a family. 1683. Cases of Lawful Solicitude.–(a) When the end is a genuine temporal good, moderate solicitude is not only lawful but is a duty dictated by prudence. Thus, a man who labors industriously and who saves, spending economically for the support of himself and his dependents and the upkeep of his home and business, is prudent in the true sense of the word, provided he is not too much absorbed in money-making or too anxious about financial affairs: “Work must be attended to, but worry must be banished” (St. Jerome). (b) When the end is a spiritual one, moderate solicitude is also a duty. Thus, St. Paul was solicitous for his Churches (II Cor., xi. 28), Timothy for the Philippians (Phil., ii. 20); those who have charge as almoners should be solicitous for the goods given for the poor, etc. 1684. Cases of Unlawful Solicitude about the Future.–(a) Solicitude is unlawful on account of the end that is intended, when one makes temporal things one’s god, and is therefore perturbed about the future, as when a person has set his heart upon obtaining some honor by fair means or foul, and is restless and disturbed in mind lest it escape him. (b) Solicitude is unlawful on account of immoderate desire, when one seeks for more than one should, as when a person who has sufficient means busies himself about too many things and deprives himself of peace and health in order to be wealthier in the future. (c) Solicitude is unlawful on account of the unsuitability of the time, when one anticipates the season for care, as when a farmer worries during planting season about the harvest, and during harvest time about the next planting. Those who willingly occupy and disquiet themselves with forebodings of dire calamities that are uncertain (e.g., the imminent destruction of the world) or of evils that cannot be prevented (e.g., their death), are also guilty of sinful solicitude. 1685. Cases of Lawful Solicitude about the Future.–(a) When the end is a lawful temporal good, moderate solicitude about the future is good, for providence for the future is a part of prudence (see 1654). Scripture praises the ant which gathers its food in the summer against the winter (Prov., vi. 6). Joseph stored up a reserve of grain (Gen., xii. 34 sqq.); Our Lord appointed Judas to act as treasurer for Himself and His followers (John, xii. 6); the Apostles kept for future expenses offerings made from the sale of fields (Acts, iv. 34, 35). (b) When the end is spiritual, reasonable solicitude is also good, and this is seen in the conduct of the early Christians who gathered alms in advance that they might have the means to bestow assistance during a famine which had been predicted (Acts, xi. 27 sqq.).”
Western people worry about the environment in ways that are rather ridiculous. (Remember – basically, the world’s oceans are polluted because of China, but we are not allowed to talk about this…) But it’s not just ridiculous if it becomes habitual and leads to the neglect of the environment of one’s soul.
Parents – have you asked your kids if they are afraid that the world is basically going to end in 10, 20, 30 years UNLESS WE DO X (usually involving giving more power to the government and major companies to control our lives)? You might want to.
There are ordinations happening! More than it might seem, actually. In truth, Ireland is the size of two or three mid-sized or large US dioceses by the numbers of Catholics and general population.
Watch the interview below about my friend Fr. Mark. I served both his diaconate and priestly ordination.
Before 1648 (the Peace of Westphalia), there weren’t exactly “countries” in the way we think of them today. But there were still kingdoms, empires, etc… There was still such a thing as “immigration,” even though it was a bit different from today.
What does the Angelic Doctor have to say about immigration? Something, it turns out. St. Thomas addresses the question in the context of a discussion on the judicial precepts of the Jews (viz., the “civil law” of Israel as given by Moses). The question he is responding to is, “Whether the judicial precepts regarding foreigners were framed in a suitable manner?” Of course, he says they are, because God gave them through Moses. Hello. So that’s the sed contra, the argument from authority.
Here is the Answer:
“I answer that, Man’s relations with foreigners are twofold: peaceful, and hostile: and in directing both kinds of relation the Law contained suitable precepts. For the Jews were offered three opportunities of peaceful relations with foreigners. First, when foreigners passed through their land as travelers. Secondly, when they came to dwell in their land as newcomers. And in both these respects the Law made kind provision in its precepts: for it is written (Exodus 22:21): ‘Thou shalt not molest a stranger [advenam]’; and again (Exodus 22:9): ‘Thou shalt not molest a stranger [peregrino].’ Thirdly, when any foreigners wished to be admitted entirely to their fellowship and mode of worship. With regard to these a certain order was observed. For they were not at once admitted to citizenship: just as it was law with some nations that no one was deemed a citizen except after two or three generations, as the Philosopher says (Polit. iii, 1). The reason for this was that if foreigners were allowed to meddle with the affairs of a nation as soon as they settled down in its midst, many dangers might occur, since the foreigners not yet having the common good firmly at heart might attempt something hurtful to the people. Hence it was that the Law prescribed in respect of certain nations that had close relations with the Jews (viz., the Egyptians among whom they were born and educated, and the Idumeans, the children of Esau, Jacob’s brother), that they should be admitted to the fellowship of the people after the third generation; whereas others (with whom their relations had been hostile, such as the Ammonites and Moabites) were never to be admitted to citizenship; while the Amalekites, who were yet more hostile to them, and had no fellowship of kindred with them, were to be held as foes in perpetuity: for it is written (Exodus 17:16): ‘The war of the Lord shall be against Amalec from generation to generation.’
In like manner with regard to hostile relations with foreigners, the Law contained suitable precepts. For, in the first place, it commanded that war should be declared for a just cause: thus it is commanded (Deuteronomy 20:10) that when they advanced to besiege a city, they should at first make an offer of peace. Secondly, it enjoined that when once they had entered on a war they should undauntedly persevere in it, putting their trust in God. And in order that they might be the more heedful of this command, it ordered that on the approach of battle the priest should hearten them by promising them God’s aid. Thirdly, it prescribed the removal of whatever might prove an obstacle to the fight, and that certain men, who might be in the way, should be sent home. Fourthly, it enjoined that they should use moderation in pursuing the advantage of victory, by sparing women and children, and by not cutting down fruit-trees of that country.”
Read the rest of the Article here. The Objections and Replies are interesting as well… though you might gasp at one or two!
Please consider a small (or not-so-small!) gift to my fundraiser today!
By giving, you will be part of something really special. I can’t wait to update you, and even give a look at one or two things going on behind the scenes…
We read in St. Alphonsus Liguori’s Praxis Confessarii – his book of advice on “how to hear confessions” (not moral theology, but “pastoral theology”) – a passage that might cause alarm in the section on occasions of sin.
Generally speaking, young men and women who are beginning to “keep company” should not be indiscriminately accused of grave sin. Still I think that it is only with difficulty that they free themselves from a proximate occasion of grave sin. This is quite clear from experience: out of a hundred young people you will scarcely find two or three who have not fallen into mortal sin in this occasion. If it is not so at first, it will soon become so. At first, they see each other because of their mutual attraction, then the attraction becomes passion, and passion then fixes itself in the heart, becomes an obsession in the mind, and leads them into countless sins. For this reason, Pico of Mirandola, bishop of Albano, issued an edict warning confessors in his diocese that such young people were not to be absolved if — after three warnings from others —they did not discontinue their company-keeping, especially if there were dates at night alone (with the clear danger of kissing and petting), or if this was done against the command of their parents, or with a companion whose speech was provocative.
By “keeping company” St. Alphonsus means going out alone with each other – at all.
You might think it’s pretty harsh. You might think it’s downright draconian.
But before the invention of the car, “dating” didn’t really exist, at least not as something socially acceptable. Instead, there was “courtship.” Family visited family, while the couple spoke to each other and interacted under the watchful eye of the parents, and possibly many others. It was unthinkable to let two young people go off alone, especially for a long time in the evening. What will they be getting up to? And how are they to evaluate their love interest properly without the help of their families?
I don’t think it’s plausible to recover courtship in any meaningful sense. It certainly can’t be normative for young people – it is just impossible to expect of anyone.
There’s a middle path, however. As late as 1958, the famous manual by McHugh and Callan is condemning “long and lone conversations in secluded spots” by interested couples as simply “wrong.” I don’t think they are all that incorrect. “Long and lone conversations” are, in my mind, appropriate only around the time of engagement and during engagement, and they should be infrequent, few, serious, and intentional, and only had if they are really necessary. Talk about those few things that are really important to discuss before marriage and don’t easily lend themselves to organic, casual conversation, and which might require some real privacy. Otherwise, go out in public or semi-public. Go to the mall. Go to dinner. Go to a party. Go to a park. Go to the family’s house (courtship!)… Nowadays – because of how our world is built – you’ll have plenty of time to chit chat alone in the car. One should be satisfied pretty much with that, and maybe picking her up and dropping her off… one of the appropriate times for a quick conversation alone. At the door, not inside.
Call me crazy, but I think that would solve a lot of problems. Don’t you?
I may be doing some more serious work on these kinds of topics… Not just here on the blog. As the kids say these days, “I’m cooking.” Stay tuned.
Some of these individuals are friends of a friend. I can tell you, without naming names, that they are SOLID. They are GOOD. It was a GOOD PICK.
Today is the great Solemnity of Christ the King. The object of my doctoral studies, and, I suppose, my friend, Pius XI, is the one who gave us this feast, albeit he had put it the Sunday preceding All Saints. I actually think it fits better here, the last Sunday of the liturgical year. Anyway, give the relevant encyclical Quas Primas a read, and pray the prayer of consecration to the Sacred Heart which he wanted done today – a favorite devotion of the Pontiff, on which he wrote another entire encyclical, Miserentissimus Redemptor:
Most sweet Jesus, Redeemer of the human race, look down upon us humbly prostrate before Thy altar. We are Thine, and Thine we wish to be; but, to be more surely united with Thee, behold each one of us freely consecrates himself today to Thy most Sacred Heart. Many indeed have never known Thee; many too, despising Thy precepts, have rejected Thee. Have mercy on them all, most merciful Jesus, and draw them to Thy Sacred Heart. Be Thou King, O Lord, not only of the faithful who have never forsaken Thee, but also of the prodigal children who have abandoned Thee; grant that they may quickly return to their Father’s house lest they die of wretchedness and hunger. Be Thou King of those who are deceived by erroneous opinions, or whom discord keeps aloof, and call them back to the harbor of truth and unity of faith, so that soon there may be but one flock and one Shepherd. Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolatry or of Islamism, and refuse not to draw them all into the light and kingdom of God. Turn Thine eyes of mercy toward the children of that race, once thy chosen people. Of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Saviour; may It now descend upon them a laver of redemption and of life. Grant, O Lord, to Thy Church assurance of freedom and immunity from harm; give peace and order to all nations, and make the earth resound from pole to pole with one cry: Praise to the divine Heart that wrought our salvation; to It be glory and honor forever. Amen.
I am occasionally hooked on archaeology, especially (but not exclusively) Biblical archaeology. Like with archival work, there is just some kind of thrill to digging stuff up.
There is WAY too little formation in seminaries and ecclesiastical universities on archaeology.
I found this channel a while ago and wanted to share one of the videos I watched, which is about one of the foundational “things” in the world of Biblical archaeology – the excavation of Jericho. You will start to get a feel for what’s going on among “the schools” in this important field of study. Of course, I am very much inclined to be with the “stick with the text” guys on most things. Enjoy…
Christian Renaissance Movement 