An Epiphany Treat

This is a wonderful piece for the Feast of the Epiphany.

By indult of our bishops, you may listen to it today. Then you may listen to it tomorrow, on Twelfth Night, as you take your tree and decorations down (but not, of course, your crib!)

Another Note From my Father

I posted about finding my Father's notebook the other day.

Here is another note which I think may be of wider interest.  This one is entitled Note on the English Bishops' Statement on the Mass, and is dated May 1975

1) Confronted with people who say that the Novus Ordo is not obligatory, and who carefully examine the legislation, the bishops say: 'It is the Law of the Church and must be obeyed!' It is inconceivable that, if there were any such law, the bishops would not refer to it explicitly.

2) Serious theological criticisms have been made of the Novus Ordo, not least by Cardinals Ottoviani and Bacci. It is not a question of accusing the Holy Father of fostering heresy. It is not good enough to 'deplore the calumnies.' Explanation and justification is required.

3) It ill behoves these miserable time-servers who did their best to dodge 'Humane Vitae' to talk about loyalty to the Pope.

The whole statement displays the tyrannous and arbitrary methods of government now inflicted upon the Faithful.

--

I cannot find a copy of the English Bishops' statement to which he refers (but see update below): if anyone knows where it may be found, I would be very interested.

--

UPDATE

Thanks to my readers' (Matthew and Bookclubber) skills in research, here is the relevant part of the bishops' statement which my father criticises above (the first part condemned ad  lib changes to the Mass - the full text may be found by following their links):

At the other extreme are those who reject all the liturgical reforms. In both cases it is a question of loyalty and obedience to the Holy See. Catholics are wrongly said to be under no obligation to accept the reformed liturgy. It is alleged that the rite of the Mass as reformed by Pope Pius v may still be lawfully offered in place of the rite approved by Pope Paul vi. The bishops by this statement wish to make it clear that the Missal of Pope Paul vi has now replaced all other missals in the Roman rite. This is a law of the Church and must be obeyed. Exceptions to the law have only been authorised for old or sick priests who may celebrate the old rite privately. An indult was granted to the bishops of England and Wales to give permission to particular groups on special occasions to use the old rite as reformed in 1967. This, permission was given on the strict condition that all danger of division would be avoided. For devotional reasons a group may be given leave to have a Mass in this rite. At all parish and community Masses, however, the rite is obligatory, whether it is in Latin or English.

"Some have been misled by propaganda which attacked Pope Paul's Missal and even accused the Holy Father of fostering heresy in the new eucharistic prayers. The bishops deplore such calumnies and call for obedience to the Holy See. In company with the bishops of the whole Church the episcopal conference of England and Wales declares its loyalty to the successor of St Peter and trusts that this statement will make it clear to priests and people that Holy Mass must be celebrated according to the rite of the Roman Missal of Pope Paul vi.

As a matter of historical fact, it can be asserted that my father was right, and the bishops wrong, on this issue, as our recent Holy Father (now emeritus) Benedict made it clear that the traditional Rite had not been abrogated, and further that it would be wrong to declare illicit what had previously been held sacred by the Church.

You Would Have Been Shocked

One of my late Father's running jokes was to collect titles for the many volumes of the  autobiography which he never intended to write.

Every now and then, he would come across a phrase that struck him, and adopt it as the title of the next volume.

One such phrase was 'You would have been shocked.'

Reading his notebook last night, I found the source for this, which also explained its resonance for him.

This is from a Pastoral Letter by Cardinal Heenan, dated 12x69.

Why does the Mass keep changing?  Here is the answer. It would have been foolhardy to introduce the changes all at once. It was obviously wiser to change gradually and gently. If all the changes had been introduced together, you would have been shocked.'

(The underlining is my Father's).

A Note From My Father

My father died a long time ago, back in 1978.  

This afternoon, I was looking unsuccessfully for a book by Knox (Mons Ronald, of course!), and found instead, squeezed between A Creed in Slow Motion and A Retreat for Lay People, a small notebook.  Only a few pages have been written in, all in my late father's handwriting. The following is the first note he made.

This note is dated September 1972. Here is what he had to say:

Two views:

1 There was a Council, certain changes were made; it went to the heads of some people, others were distressed by the changes. Things are now settling down.

2 a) The above is what might have been expected to happen; it is not what did happen. In fact, (using the Council as its occasion, and the fact that people were prepared for changes as its opportunity) a heretical clique has seized power and is bent on the destruction of the Church from within - what the Pope has called 'auto demolition' - and the introduction of a new religion.  The situation is more serious than the Reformation not because there are heretics about, but because of the complicity, or at least silence, of the authorities, and because the heretics have acquired the semblance of legality.

b) The root of the heretical movement is the idea of secular progress (most characteristically Marxist). The natural progress of the world from the atom to the fully socialised community is the great reality, and the Church is just one factor in this (at best).

c) The strategy is to destroy distinctions: the Pope is not much different from other bishops ("collegiality"); bishops are not much different from priests; priests are not much different from laymen ("democratisation"); Catholics are not much different from other Christians; Christians are not much different from the rest of men.

d) The means of achieving all this are (amongst others):

1. The monopoly of the 'Catholic' press
2. The catechetical movement
3. The ecumenical movement
4. The destruction of the whole web of authentic devotional life, and especially the new rite of the "coena domenica sine missa."

Two more views

1) Provided the essence of the Mass remains, all else - rubrics, language, music etc - is relatively unimportant. Tastes may differ.

2) a) But it can be argued that the new rite, while not necessarily invalid, is designed to obscure the Sacrifice and the Real Presence.  It is used at Taizé, and indeed 'Prex' 2 could be used by anyone. It fits the new ecumenical religion.

b) Are the 'inessentials' really so inessential? The Roman rite was doctrinally unassailable; the Latin was a powerful bond and manifestation of unity.

c) The new rite does not follow the lines of the constitution on the Sacred Liturgy.

--

And there the note ends.  There are other notes in the book, which I may transcribe in due course.

I found this very interesting, not least given its date. In particular I was struck by his reflections on the strategy and means (2 c and d above).  

I notice that, while presenting two views (and then two more), he does not come down in favour of one or the other - but I think his thinking is clear, nonetheless…

On writing that, I realise that I am assuming that this was his own thinking: it may, of course, have been notes taken from a talk given by someone else, but I have some reasons for doubting that (for a start, I think he would have noted that fact, were it the case.)

It was his anniversary the other day: please spare a prayer for him.

Requiescat in pace.

A Turbulent Deacon

It's always the way, when you (or at least, I) do a list of (for example) blogs to award a prize to: waking up the next day and thinking, 'But what about…?'

I have already added one well-deserved extra to the list, but another blog I often read with interest and approval is written by that turbulent deacon, Nick Donnelly: Protect the Pope.

Not that I always agree with everything he writes (see for example, Patricius' analysis of a recent mis-step, here). And indeed, his latest post  seems to me to be rather harsh.

But that's not the point: I don't read - or recommend - people because I always agree with what they say. Rather, because I find them variously stimulating, thought-provoking, or entertaining.

It is easy to forget the atmosphere when Deacon Nick started his blog: it was before Pope Benedict's visit here, and the press was full of vitriol and misrepresentation. Protect the Pope was established to counter that, and dissect and correct many of the misrepresentations.

Since then it has developed, as blogs do, but with a similar locus of attention: countering misrepresentations of the Faith and championing orthodoxy. Notwithstanding the fact that I think he occasionally misses the target, overstates the case, or reads others through an overly-critical lens (none of which are faults to which I incline in the least, let it be understood!) I think Deacon Nick plays a very important role in the Catholic blogosphere.

This is the turbulence of my title, and is, of course, a reference to St Thomas à Beckett: when there is so much idiocy about, then turbulence of this kind is the correct response.

Bringing sunshine...

This was already, of course, an award winning blog, but I have just won a second: a Sunshine Award, courtesy of the irrepressible Eccles.

The Sunshine Award is for those who 'who positively and creatively inspire others in the blogosphere.'

And of course, reminds one of this.

Doubtless there will be those who castigate me for accepting this, Eccles not being universally popular. But there seem to be lots of pots and kettles involved in all that, so I will ignore any such censure.

Let nobody be churlish enough to suggest that Eccles is merely returning the favour, because I nominated him for a Liebster Award some time ago.

As usual, this award comes with strings attached - or at least conditions to fulfil:

1 illustrate the Award in the post 

2 Link to the blogger who was kind enough to nominate you.

3. Write 10 pieces of information about yourself.

4. Nominate ten fellow bloggers “who positively and creatively inspire others in the blogosphere.”

5. Leave a comment on the nominees’ blogs to tell them of the award.

So without further ado, having done 1 & 2, what I now have to do is to reveal ten facts about myself.

Bear in mind that I am mendacious:

1) I first got to know Mrs T in a school production of The Mikado.

2) Despite my Romanism, two sentences that regularly bring me up short, in terms of examination of conscience, were written by Anglicans (C S Lewis: 'I would have thought that a man with your advantages…' and T S Eliot 'the greatest treason: to do the right deed for the wrong reason.'

3) My maternal grandfather squandered the family fortune on fast cars.

4) My paternal grandfather was a conscientious objector in WW1; and my father was one in WW2 (though he later recanted, when he learned the true evil of Hitler's regime).

5) My kids have nearly as many aunts as Bertie Wooster - and nearly as terrifying.

6) I once, as a teenager, got the zip of my trouser fly entangled in the mesh of a supermarket basket, leading to much embarrassment when I tried to put the basket down at the checkout.

7) I worked for the post office on the railways in the Christmas vacation, and dropped a mailbag under a train, resulting in one of the steel D-rings at the top being turned into tin foil.

8) The R&B band I played in at University played covers (ranging from Tom Petty to Elvis Costello, the Stranglers to The Monkees)  really really quickly, and managed to make them all sound the same.

9) This year, we celebrate our thirtieth wedding anniversary.

10) My kids really did believe there was a Father Book, from which I knew the answers to everything. 

The next task that goes with this award is to nominate ten other blogs (though some I would have nominated have already been chosen….):

1 The Muniment Room

2 Catholic and Loving It

3 Cum Lazaro

4 The Sensible Bond

5 Porta Caeli

6 Bara Brith

7 Valle Adurni

8 Beaker Folk of Husborne Crawley

9 Gateshead Revisited

10 That the Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill.

So now I am off to leave comments on all those blogs to let them know of the great honour I have just bestowed.


UPDATE

I found, on visiting my chosen recipients, that one has already been awarded this prize; I won'\t tell you which, so you have to go and look at all of them.  However, it does give me the opportunity to add a further blog, which should have been in the original list:

10 (bis) Twelve Mini Pilgrimages

Ring in the New

We had a great evening, to see out the Old Year and welcome the New.

We were one down, as Bernie is in London with her boyfriend, and was watching the fireworks on the South Bank.

We were also one family down, as the friends who have joined us for New Year's Eve for many years had other commitments (a better offer) elsewhere.

So we decided we would simply have to have a good time on our own, and we managed it.  After a few games around the stove, we climbed a local fell.  Ant had a rucksack full of kindling and wood, along with hot chocolate and coffee.

We noticed others planning to ascend, so thought we would settle just below the summit; but that proved impossible: the wind was very strong and rain and sleet were coming down.  So we ascended to the top, where there is a large stone obelisk, which provided a measure of shelter.

There we were joined by a couple from a village further up the valley, with their youngest boy, who enjoyed watching us trying to get a fire lit.  Eventually, by getting the whole family (minus Bernie) lying in a circle to form some sort of wind break, and by dint of striking matches in large bundles, we managed to get a flame to take hold.  And then the fire really got going.  The wind gusted it into strong flames and it produced real warmth.

So we treated our new friends to a few Scottish ballads (mixed in with the odd Tom Lehrer, Don Mclean etc song). Suddenly midnight was upon us, and as we sang Auld Lang Syne, all the hotels around the lake we were looking down on let off their fireworks. It was a magnificent site, seen from above.  Goldie did not enjoy it, but she is quite a patient dog.

Then our new friends revealed they too had some fireworks: they had thought they would struggle to light them in the wind and rain, but by using a glowing stick from our fire, were able to do so; so doubtless all the hotel partygoers enjoyed the sight of fire and fireworks on the mountain too.

It was very wet and windy, and quite cold, so we didn't hang around too long. But the descent was hilarious. There is a broad grassy trod for a lot of the way, pretty steep. The rain had converted this into a very hazardous descent, and I went down a long way, inadvertently, on my back, to the children's delight.  In fairness, they did little better, and only Mrs T reached the bottom with her dignity intact and her overtrousers unmuddied.

And so home - where Charlie played the piano, and we all sang along.  He was flicking through various song books, starting stuff at random stopping when he got bored, and then playing other things from memory which he preferred.  My favourite was A Farewell to Stromness, some of which he remembered correctly…

So it was two before we headed off to bed - and for some strange reason the kids aren't up yet, though it has just gone eleven o'clock.

Happy New Year and a Happy Feast Day to all my readers.