Author: Msgr. Charles Pope

Posted on

Truth in the New Translation Series: # 2 – The Memento Domine or Commemoration of the Living in the Roman Canon

This is the second installment of a series begun last week on the New English Translation of the Roman Missal. In this series I seek to present the new translation as a truer translation and hence a truer expression of the Catholic faith than the version in current use. In case you missed the first installment it is here:  Truth in the New Translation Series – The Te Igitur

With the new translation the richness of the Catholic faith in the Roman Missal is once again made available to Catholics in English speaking settings. Many of these riches have been kept hidden by an inferior translation ( a paraphrase, actually) in use since 1970.

We now turn our attention to the second paragraph of the Roman Canon known as the Memento Domine. Presented first is the Latin text, followed by the new translation, followed by the version in current use:

Latin Text: Meménto, Dómine, famulórum famularúmque tuárum N. & N.  Et ómnium circumstántium, quorum tibi fides cógnita est, et nota devótio: pro quibus tibi offérimus, vel qui tibi ófferunt hoc sacrifícium laudis, pro se, suísque ómnibus, pro redemptióne animárum suárum, pro spe salútis et incolumitátis suæ; tibíque reddunt vota sua ætérno Deo, vivo et vero.

New Translation: Remember, Lord, your servants N. and N. and all gathered here, whose faith and devotion are known to you. For them and all who are dear to them we offer you this sacrifice of praise or they offer it for themselves and all who are dear to them, for the redemption of their souls, in hope of health and well-being, and fulfilling their vows to you, the eternal God, living and true.

Version in current use: Remember, Lord, your people, especially those for whom we now pray, N. and  N. Remember all of us gathered here before you. You know how firmly we believe in you and dedicate ourselves to you. We offer you this sacrifice of praise for ourselves and those who are dear to us. We pray to you, our living and true God, for our well-being and redemption.

1. We are God’s servants – In the translation in current use we refer to ourselves as “your people” but the Latin refers to us as famulorum famularumque (literally “servants and handmaids). The new translation restores the more accurate word “servants” to refer to us. It is true that the use of the word “handmaids” has been dropped. This is likely due to its rather archaic sound in the modern setting. The translators have simply made use of the single word, “servants” to  refer to both male and female though, it is true,  the Latin text distinguishes the two. Perhaps in the modern setting we can say it is a distinction without a difference. But the return to the truer rendering of the word “servants” is helpful to our age. In current times we are slow to acknowledge that, before anything else we are or do, we are God’s servants. We are not God’s equal, neither are we free to set the terms of our obedience to God. That would be pride, the primordial sin wherein Adam and Eve essentially said, “I will decide what I want to do and I will decide whether it is right or wrong.” But as it is, we are not to yield to pride, we are to realize and accept that our greatest glory is to be God’s servant. The Lord Jesus said, Whoever wishes to be great among you will be your servant; whoever wishes to be first among you will be the slave of all. For the Son of Man did not come to be served but to serve and to give his life as a ransom for many (Mk 10:43-45). It is appropriate as an antidote to the current climate which has downplayed our status as servants of the Lord.

2. A less presumptive declaration of our faith and devotion – The current version rather presumptively tells God what he should know by saying, You know how firmly we believe in you and dedicate ourselves to you. This tone is rather presumptive and boldly  asserts things about ourselves that we are not the judge of. Hence the new translation more accurately and humbly renders the Latin, and all gathered here, whose faith and devotion are known to you. Now we will no longer tell God what he should know about us but rather we will simply and humbly accept that he knows for himself and on his own terms the true degree of our faith and devotion. Here too is another antidote to the rather bold and presumptive tone our times.

3. The distinction between the offering of the clergy and the people  – What the priest is doing at the Altar is separate and distinct from what the gathered people are doing. The ordained ministerial priest in virtue of his ordination is making the offering to the Father in persona Christi capitis (in the person of Christ the head). It is Christ himself who is speaking and ministering through the ordained priest. The Latin text does say offerimus (we offer) but the “we” referred to here is the celebrant along with any other con-celebrating priests. As to the people the Latin text says, vel qui tibi offerunt (or who (themselves) offer unto you). Hence the people DO offer unto God, but in an offering distinct from (though related to) what the priest(s) celebrant(s) are doing. The people are offering prayers, a sacrifice of praise, bread and wine, and monetary support, indeed the gift of their very selves to God. And they make this offering as an exercise of the common or royal priesthood they received in baptism. But as the Catechism points out the common priesthood  of all the baptized  and the ministerial priest are ordered to one another but differ essentially (cf CCC # 1547). The Second Vatican Council affirmed that

Though they differ from one another in essence and not only in degree, the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial or hierarchical priesthood are nonetheless interrelated: each of them in its own special way is a participation in the one priesthood of Christ. The ministerial priest, by the sacred power he enjoys, teaches and rules the priestly people; acting in the person of Christ, he makes present the Eucharistic sacrifice, and offers it to God in the name of all the people. But the faithful, in virtue of their royal priesthood, join in the offering of the Eucharist.  They likewise exercise that priesthood in receiving the sacraments, in prayer and thanksgiving, in the witness of a holy life, and by self-denial and active charity. (Lumen Gentium 10)

Hence the more careful rendering  of the new translation spells out the careful wording of the Latin text which preserves the inter-related though distinct offerings taking place here: For them and all who are dear to them we offer  you this sacrifice of praise or they offer it for themselves and all who are dear to them. The lack of proper distinction in the past decades has led to harm in both distinct branches of the priesthood. It has led to a clericalization of the laity, thus undermining respect for their proper role and mission in the temporal order as well as at mass. It has also tended to laicize the clergy thus diminishing respect for their distinct role among the faithful in terms of the celebration of the Sacred liturgy, thus sanctifying, teaching and governing in sacred matters and equipping the laity to exercise proper oversight of the temporal order. It is surely hoped that the new translation will assist in rearticulating and thus recognizing the proper roles and distinctiveness of clergy and laity.

4. Rendering  our vows– The new translation says that the faithful,  in making their offering,  are  fulfilling their vows to you (a fairly literal rendering of the Latin tibíque reddunt vota sua). This is a gloss on a phrase that occurs not infrequently in the psalms occurring over a dozen times in this or a similar form: I am under vows to you, O God; I will present my thank offerings to you. (Ps 56:12) or again, Praise awaits you, O God, in Zion; to you our vows will be fulfilled (Ps 65:1). The fact is that we owe God our praise. To praise God is described repeatedly in the psalms and elsewhere in Scripture as a kind of debt we owe to God. He is worthy of our praise and since we have this debt we have a kind of vow or promise to render and fulfill that debt of gratitude and praise. Too many people today think of worship as something that exists for them. Hence we hear people say that they “Don’t get anything out of Church” or that they “Are not being fed.” But in the end it is not about you or me. The focus is God and that we owe him a debt of gratitude and praise. We ought to go to Church simply because God is worthy and we have a debt or vow to render. It is nice if the sermon is good, my favorite song is sung etc. but that is not why we go. We go to render or fulfill our sacred duty and vow, to give thanks to God who is infinitely worthy.

The current English version misses the Scriptural allusion altogether by simply saying “We pray to you.” Fine, but again notice the subtle shift to us and what we are doing. Notice too a complete loss of the reason, (our vow or duty). The current text also stumbles badly because it inaccurately links the “We pray” to an expected reward: “for our well being and redemption.” In other words the current translation links our act of praying to reward whereas the Latin text and the new translation link to a duty pure and simple. Here again, the new translation will provide a vast benefit by helping us to recover reference to our duty to worship God and render him thanks simply because he is worthy and we have a duty, obligation and vow to render this even without any hope of reward for it.

So here we are only two paragraphs into the Roman Canon (Eucharistic Prayer I) and we have had much to discuss. The New translation provides vast benefit in terms of teaching and the recovery of sacred truths which the 1970 version obscured. As can be seen the poor translation of 1970 is directly connected to many struggles we have had in the Church in terms of an improper understanding of the faith and of worship. It is not the only cause, but surely we can see how the new translation will help us recover important truths. More installments in this series will be coming soon.

Video: I realize that some of you do not appreciate Gospel music the way I do. But one of the great blessings of Gospel music is that its focus is almost always on God and what God has done. So much of other modern Church music focuses too much on us. One of the great themes of Gospel music is that God is worthy, worthy of all our praise. This song says,

I’ve got so much to thank God for. o many wonderful blessings, and so many open doors. A brand new mercy along with each new day That’s why I praise You and for this I give You praise

For waking me up this morning, That’s why I praise You,  For starting me on my way,  That’s why I praise You.  For letting me see the sunshine,  that’s why I praise You  of a brand new day.  A brand new mercy along with each new day,  That’s why I praise You and for this I give You praise!

Posted on

Simply Catholic: Why the Faith Ought to Trump Politics

I have long observed that many if not most Catholics are more passionate about their politics than their faith. This goes for both sides of the political spectrum and for moderates too. I will not say  that I am immune from the tendency either. It’s just so much easier to speak of the faith when it conforms to something in our political mindset or worldview, and it’s so easy to doubt it if it offends against it.

Instead of being the light by which we see all things, the Faith tends to get “tucked under” our worldview and political view, our careers and preferences. The world should be seen through faith. The world should be on trial by the Word of God and the teachings of the Church. But as it usually happens, the Church, and the Scriptures end up being on trial instead. In this situation Faith is not the priority, politics and the world are. In any conflict between the two, guess what usually has to give way?

Some examples and stories:

1. Abortion– The most common and perhaps most egregious example is the horrible scourge of abortion. Too many Catholics allow their politics to trump what they know is the consistent teaching of their Faith and the Church. It is a horrible thing too when we consider that 70 million Catholics in agreement on this issue would be hard to ignore politically. If even 10% showed up in Washington for the Pro-life March that would be 7 million people on the Mall and no media bias could ignore that many people. As it is we are woefully divided and the usual cause of this is politics. Most people of any political persuasion know Abortion is indefensible. But they line up on the issue more on political than moral reasoning. Saying that they merely want to stay out of people’s personal affairs does not add up since EVERY law or legal limit inserts itself into people’s personal affairs. The question is what should the limits be or not be and that gets back to politics. It is a sad truth that many Americans allow politics to over-ride the most crucial moral decision of the day. The Church teaching against abortion is not Republican, it is Catholic.

2. A Story– As a priest in Washington DC I am called on numerous occasions to meet with members of the DC City Council and also on fewer occasions, with Federal officials. Most recently I was meeting with a certain City official over the issue of recognizing so-called Same-sex “Marriage.” I explained to him why the Church opposed such a change in the Law. I remember well what he said to me and though the quote is not exact it’s pretty close, “Father, I know what your Church teaches. But I am a politician, I was not born yesterday and I have read the polls. Almost half of your people don’t agree with your teachings about homosexuality. You claim to speak for them but you don’t speak for at least half,  and I think,  more than half. Don’t tell me how your people are going to vote. I already know how they are going to vote. You don’t represent most of them and surely not the votes I count on to win.” I guess I could have gone on to distinguish between the beliefs and voting patterns of Church-going vs. non-Church- going Catholics but that would merely have led to the fact that we rather pathetically can count on only 30% of Catholics to even come to Church, let alone vote with us. Truth was he DID know his business and he can count votes better than I can. How different would this scenario have been if Catholics were Catholics first before anything else and did vote based on their faith and what the Church teaches about marriage rather than other things such as the wallet or politcal party or personal views? Had that been the case he probably would have asked to me with me and other clergy.

3. What party is the Catholic Church?– Neither of course. But depending on what is in the news you can count on labels being applied. If the issue is abortion, embryonic stem cell research, or homosexual “marriage” detractors will say the Church and bishops are “in bed” with the Republicans. But if the issue is immigration reform, capital punishment, concerns about war, or care for the poor, then they’re all “just a bunch of Democrats.”

Now I hear the objections even now that go something like: “Abortion is doctrinal, Capital Punishment is not. True enough. But it is only solemn and doctrinal things that should claim our loyalties? What if the Pope and Bishops as our teachers and leaders are asking us to stand together on an important issue in the battle against the culture of death?…an issue that affects our credibility (rightly or wrongly) with the world on the matter of abortion? Even if there are proper distinctions to be made, what if the Pope and bishops have determined that, as a pastoral strategy, we ought to oppose the State taking life under either of these circumstances?  Does that have any bearing on the issue? And if not, why not? I am aware that some would not attribute their disagreement here to politics at all but rather are clinging to distinction that the Church does not absolutely forbid capital punishment. But is absolute forbiddance the only source of our unity? Is it not enough that the Catechism, recent Popes and the Bishops see the need for recourse to capital punishment as practically non existent (cf  CCC # 2267). Scripture does ascribe the right of capital punishment to the State. But the Church, through her leaders,  has asked the State to have little or no recourse to this right. What if our stance on capital punishment was not rooted in liberalism but in Catholicism? And what if we stood together with the Church on this issue out of respect for what our legitimate teachers and leaders have asked us to do as a prudential rather than a doctrinal matter? Not as democrats, but as Catholics.

And as regards immigration. I can almost guarantee you that even Bishop’s who are predictably conservative on many issues aren’t going to line up with a strong law and order approach to this issue. There are Catholic and Biblical principles which call us to welcome the stranger and the foreigner. Legality is an important issue as well but it is complicated. Many who are currently here illegally came here legally and their status expired and the process of legalization is bewildering. Not all illegal immigrants have flagrantly violated the law in coming here. Hence, while upholding a respect for law the instinct of the Church is also to attend to the humanity of the problem which is often complex. The Catholic position on this will not be (cannot be) strict, law and order, enforcement. The posture for a Catholic ought to be, why does the Church teach in this manner and why are the Bishops as teachers of the faith taking this position? The reasons are Catholic not Democratic.

4. A story– Some few ago when I was pastor of St. Thomas More Parish I joshed with the congregation there, who, by the way, love me exceedingly more that I deserved. But I said, in jest but not without some truth: “When I preached against abortion some said, ‘He is a Republican.’ When I spoke against Capital Punishment some here said, ‘He is a Democrat.’ When I said, Gay marriage is wrong and that Children should not be given condoms some said, ‘See, he is a Republican!’ Then I preached along with the Pope and Bishops expressing concern about going to War in Iraq so quickly, and when we raised millions to build a new Recreation Center for the kids of Southeast, some said, ‘He is a Democrat!’  And all this time I just thought I was a Catholic Christian. “

Well, I may have stirred up a hornet’s nest here. But true Catholicism is radical. It cannot be tamed by any political party or mindset. True Catholicism will comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. As it was with Christ, most every one will have reason to hate it, and some will come to love the faith as it is and the Church as she is. In the end we are to be those who are “simply Catholic.”  Every other party affiliation, membership, alliance, or connection must yield to the Faith and be judged by it. No worldly thought should ever trump the Faith which God has revealed through the Church. And, even in some matters that are prudential in nature, our alliance to the Church founded by Jesus Christ ought to win the day when it comes giving the benefit of any doubt.

You will surely want to add some distinctions, and a few “yes-buts.”  That’s what comments are for. But be careful not to distinguish the main point to death which is that in the end we should be simply, plainly and essentially Catholic.

In this video, Cardinal George and the Chicago Archdiocese are making a similar point very creatively:

Posted on

Still Catholic: A New Poll Says 86% of Catholics Have Not Allowed Abuse Scandal to Shake Their Faith

Please permit a brief blog from me today. I am just stepping off a plane from Seattle where I have been the past few days and it is rather late.

I would like to cal to your attention a CBS News report on how Catholics are dealing with the Sexual Abuse scandal.

A New Poll indicates that 86% have not allowed it to affect their belief in the Catholic Faith. The writted version of the CBS article with other links can be read here: Catholics Still Loyal

It is more evidence of what I have also come to know that Catholics are more sophisticated in such matters that the some have either allowed us to be or wanted us to be. I think most Catholics know that there is sin in the Church and that this is surely one of the most egregious things we have recently experienced. But I also think that most Catholics know that God associates with sinners as well as saints  and that the Church, like any other gathering where humans beings are involved will have significant struggles and well and great aspects.

I know that some will remark that what I have just said amounts to a minimizing of what has happened. It deny that it does and surely intend no such minimizing. However most Catholics know that there is more to the Church that the sexual abuse crisis, more to her than abusive priests, or Bishops who were sleepy. The fact is that there are innumerable good things that are happening in the Church as you will see in this video. There are good priests, bishops, and religious, good lay people. The Lord is being worshipped, the poor are being served, schools continue to operate, and many people find the Lord in the Catholic Church.

Our sins are real and hurtful, but our graces are also real and helpful. Enjoy this video.


Watch CBS News Videos Online

Posted on

The Price of Our Faith: Do You Know How the Apostles Were Martyred?

It is too easy to take our faith for granted. We can complain at the slightest requirement. Perhaps the Mass is “too long.” Perhaps the air conditioning or PA system is less than ideal. Perhaps the Church’s moral teaching seems too demanding or “out of touch” with modern thinking. Perhaps some  aspect of the Liturgy seems “boring.” And so forth.

But have you recalled that martyrs died so you could have this faith? Every one of the Apostles except St. John the Evangelist died a martyr’s death for our capacity to know that Jesus is Lord and that he died and rose for us.

  1. Andrew was crucified on an X shaped cross after being scourged. He preached to his tormentors to his last breath.
  2. Bartholomew had his skin flayed off
  3. James the Great (Son of Zebedee) was beheaded
  4. James the Younger was cast off the Southeast pinnacle of the Temple. When the 100 foot drop did not fully kill him he was beat to death with clubs.
  5. John the Evangelist was thrown into a vat of boiling oil and when he miraculously survived he was sent to prison on the Isle where Patmos where he died years later.
  6. Jude was shot through with arrows
  7. Simon was Crucified
  8. Matthew was killed with a sword
  9. Phillip was beheaded
  10. Peter was crucified upside down.
  11. Thomas was stabbed to death with a spear
  12. St. Matthias was stoned then beheaded.
  13. Mark was dragged to death by horses.
  14. Paul was beheaded
  15. Luke was Hanged to death

What will you suffer for handing on the faith? The martyrs went to death to proclaim Christ but some us cannot bear if some one merely raises an eyebrow at us or scoffs. Merely being less popular or excluded from  the world’s admiration is too high a price for many. The next time you recite the Creed at Mass remember those words are written with blood. The next time you kids protest going to Church or your teenager scorns the faith you insist they practice, remember that others have faced far more formidable does than an unhappy child. The next time you are challenged for your faith and merely have to  risk ridicule, remember others suffered (and still suffer) prison. Many were (and still are) killed for it.

Remember the Martyrs and stay faithful, dedicated and courageous. Stand firm in the Faith and never give up.

Posted on

Truth in the New Translation Series: The Opening of the Roman Canon

I have little understanding why anyone would not want a new translation. I DO understand that familiarity is often appreciated but the fact is,  what we have been using since 1970 is not even a translation. At best,  it is a paraphrase. For those of us who know Latin, the poverty of the current English Missal was enough to provoke anger and deep sorrow. The richness of the Latin text is great and masterful,  and that most Catholics have had no real access to it is a matter that has needed correction for decades.

In this series which I begin today as an occasional feature  I would like to look at some of the  new texts which have already been released. I would like to compare them both to the Latin text and to the current rendering (I cannot call it a translation) we are currently using. I would like to begin with the venerable Roman Canon. In this installment we will look just at the opening lines of that text. As you will see many important teachings are being recovered in the new translation, teaching never lost in the Latin but soon to be restored by a correct and complete translation to the English speaking world. I list first the Latin, then the new translation, then the current rendering for your reference. There follows my commentary.

Te igitur, clementissime Pater, per Iesum Christum, Filium tuum, Dominum nostrum, supplices rogamus ac petimus, uti accepta habeas et benedicas + haec dona haec munera, haec sancta sacrificia illibata, in primis, quae tibi offerimus pro Ecclesia tua sancta catholica: quam pacificare, custodire, adunare et regere digneris toto orbe terrarum: una cum famulo tuo Pap nostro N. et Antistite nostro N. et omnibus orthodoxis atque catholicae et apostolicae fidei cultoribus.

New Translation: To you, therefore, most merciful Father, we make humble prayer and petition through Jesus Christ, your Son, our Lord: and bless these gifts, these offerings, these holy and unblemished sacrifices, which we offer you first of all for your holy Catholic Church. Be pleased to grant her peace, to guard, unite and govern her throughout the whole world, together with your servant N. our Pope and N. our Bishop, and all those who, holding to the truth, hand on the catholic and apostolic faith.

Current Rendering: We come to you, Father, with praise and thanksgiving, through Jesus Christ your Son. Through him we ask you to accept and bless + these gifts we offer you in sacrifice. We offer them for your holy catholic Church, watch over it, Lord, and guide it; grant it peace and unity throughout the world. We offer them for N. our Pope, for N. our bishop, and for all who hold and teach the catholic faith that comes to us from the apostles.

Observations:

  1. Getting our focus right– Notice that the New translation begins “To you therefore” whereas the current usage has “We come to you.” The New translation renders the Latin (Te igitur) correctly. But of equal importance is the fact that the proper focus is restored in the New Translation. The focus shifts from us (“we”) to God (“You”).  One of the greatest problems with modern liturgy has been its anthropocentric focus. Modern liturgical notions have wanted to focus on the  self-aware, gathered community than seems to frequently to celebrate and focus on itself. Modern songs go on at great length to describe that we are gathered, that we are church, that we are called, chosen, etc. Modern church architecture too has tended to focus the community upon itself with circular and fan shaped churches. It is true that perhaps in the liturgies of the early half of the 20th century that the congregation had all but been forgotten. But the over correction now needs correction itself. The focus of worship is God, what God has done, is doing and who He is. God is worthy of our worship and praise. Liturgy does not exist to entertain me or please me. It is directed to God. God, it is true speaks to us and ministers to us,  but until we focus on Him and pay attention to him as our true focus, the Lord’s ministry to us is less fruitful than it should be. Consider for example a visit to the doctor. If the focus is merely on what pleases me and makes me feel good, and not the truth that the Doctor offers, the fruitfulness of the visit to the doctor is severely compromised. In the same way, if my visit to God’s house is on me and what pleases me and affirms me, and not on the truth that God proclaims and on his goodness and wisdom, my visit to God’s house is far less fruitful. Hence the Latin text and the new translation focuses on God and leaves behind the anthropocentric emphasis of the current rendering.
  2. Celebrating the Father and the Son– Notice the Latin text and the new translation contain far more adjectives in reference to the Father and the Son than the current rendering. The current render calls him merely “Father” whereas the Latin and the more faithful New translation refer to him as a most clement or most merciful Father. Further the Son is referred to as Jesus Christ your Son and our Lord. The Lordship of Jesus Christ cannot be emphasized enough in an age which has tended to reduce him to a merely affirming brother who told us to love each other and other nice things. Further, the great mercy and clemency of the Father must also be emphasized in an age which has tended to identify the Father with the “vengeful God of the Old Testament.”
  3. Ecstatic joy in the gifts we offer– There is a kind of ecstatic joy in the Latin and the new translation as we describe what we offer as gifts, offering and unblemished sacrifices. When I celebrate the Mass in Latin I sense a real joy as I say haec dona! haec munera! haec sancta sacrificia illibata! (these gifts, these offerings, these holy unspotted sacrifices) We are joyful in what we bring to God and we describe them almost as a child who has personally made a gift for a parent and joyfully presents it. The current rendering does not capture this joy but simply speaks of the them as gifts we offer in sacrifice. Gone is any reference to them as being holy or unspotted. The Old Testament had required a sacrificial lamb that was unblemished, hence the new translation also recaptures the scriptural allusion of the Latin.
  4. Recovering the Church as Bride– One of the most egregious tendencies of the current rendering is to consistently refer to the Church as “it” rather than as “she” and “her.” The Church is not an impersonal institution but is the great Bride of Christ. She is His Bride and our Mother. You will note that the new translation restores the proper pronoun “her” as opposed to the impersonal pronoun “it”.
  5. The Church needs more than guidance, she needs governance–  Note too that the new translation asks the Lord to grant her peace, to guard, unite and govern her. The current rendering is less strong asking the Lord merely to “guide” the Church rather than govern her. Frankly we need more than guidance. We DO need governance. We need commandments, and clear instruction. Too many moderns prefer a suggestive and supportive God who affirms but does not correct or punish, who does not direct and command. But the real and true God does command, does insist and does correct and punish. It is proper that the Latin “regere” should once again be properly rendered “govern.”
  6. A papal title recovered – One of the great titles of the Pope is Servus Servorum Dei – the Servant of the Servants of God. The current rendering omitted what the Latin says and simply called him our Pope. He is that but there is no greater dignity than to be the servant of God. In Mark 10:43-44  the Lord told the Apostles that the greatest among the flock must be the servant, even the slave of the others. The Pope’s most profound quality is that he has authority as one who serves.
  7. The faith is true– The Latin text is ancient and makes use of the word orthodox. It is used as an adjective, not as a proper Noun as though it were referring to the Orthodox Churches of the East. The word “orthodox” refers literally to “straight (or correct) thinking.” Hence it means that which is revealed to us and which is true. Hence the New translation correctly renders the word orthodoxis in a way that avoids the impression of the Churches of the east and captures what the Latin was originally getting at. The orthodox are those who cling or hold to what is true. The current rendering simply omits any reference to this word. But more than ever we need to recover a sense today that our faith is not just a viewpoint, or a way of thinking. Our faith is a truth claim. The opposite of what we teach is not just less meaningful, it is false. Jesus said, For this I was born and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to my voice. (John 18:37). The Roman Canon alludes to this verse here. It is good that we have this back in  the new translation. More than ever we need to recover a notion that when the Church announces the faith to the world, she (we) are not just expressing an opinion. We are speaking the truth. And those who are of the truth listen to us.

Well, we’re just getting started. And you can see how much has been lost and how much is being recovered in the new translation just these few lines. Praise God for this new translation which restores to us many teachings lost by the poor paraphrase we are currently using. I hope you’ll see that any discomfort in getting used to a new text is more than worth the price to recover the richness of the Latin Text.

Msgr. Bruce Harbert is a member of the new ICEL commission which was responsible for developing the new translation. In this 11 minute video he describes some of the insights and history of the new translation.

Posted on

Ordination to the Priesthood – The Church’s Physical Link to Christ and the Apostles is”Hands On”

We are entering the season for ordinations. And perhaps a worthy reflection is to recall that one of the great glories of the Catholic Church is her historical link to Christ and the Apostles.  The Catholic link to Christ himself and the apostles is not merely some moral unity, or a kind of invisible union, it is not merely a knowledge through books and historical data, precious those these things are.  No indeed, there is more at work here. There is also an actual physical union through the Sacrament of Holy Orders. In this sacrament, there is a laying on of hands that stretches right back to the Apostles and Jesus.

Unique to the Catholic and Orthodox Churches – Only the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Churches can make the claim that they historically go back right to Christ and the Apostles. Every other Christian (Protestant) denomination lacks this antiquity. They were all founded less than 500 years ago, some even less than 100 years ago. Further, they literally severed the physical, hands on connection to Christ by casting aside the ministerial priesthood and hence the laying on of hands that signifies this sacrament.  They have ministers, but not priests. The Anglicans are an exception, in that they consider their ministers to be priests. Yet they are not considered by the Catholic Church to have valid orders since they went through a long period wherein they did explicitly abandon the intent to hand on the priesthood, hence the link was severed.   

Biblical and Patristic roots – It is clear in the Acts of the Apostles that when the apostles chose successors and co-workers to share in their apostolic ministry they “laid hands” on them. Paul and Barnabas had hands laid on them for their work as Apostles (Acts 13:3, 1 Tim 4:14 etc.). Paul later counsels Timothy to be careful on whom he “lays hands” when appointing bishops and deacons (1 Tim 5:22 etc). All the earliest documents of the Church such as the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch make it clear that this laying on of hands continued. This laying on of hands came to be known as “ordination.”

Every valid priest has “connections” – The Catholic Church through this laying on of hands actually preserves a physical link to Jesus himself and the Apostles he chose. History for us is a “hands-0n” kind of history, a “hands-on” link going back 2000 years. Every validly ordained Catholic bishop has this physical as well as spiritual link to the apostles. Every Bishop is a successor to the apostles. The priests share in this office and this link (though not in its fullness) for they too have hands laid on them by the bishop. I am often humbled to think of the “connections” I have with the early Church.

The Faith is literally handed on – So fellow Catholics, “stay connected” and rejoice in our “hands on” historical heritage. Now you know why it is said that the faith is “handed on.”

The following video shows highlights of the ordination of priests. In this case the ordination took place in Portland Oregon. I would like to show you highlights of our beautiful Washington ordinations but I am not aware of any film footage I can post. But this is a beautiful video.

Posted on

Under Grace, the Law is a Gift

One of the biggest mistakes a Christian can make is to misunderstand the moral law. For a Christian the Moral Law is not just a set of rules we have to follow, it is rather a description of the transformed Christian life. The Christian who begins to receive the ministry of Jesus Christ through grace will see his life transformed. He or she will begin to be more generous, more chaste, more honest and trustworthy. Such a person will begin to think differently, have better priorities, will see sins increasingly put to death. He or she will be more loving, more serene, more confident, more faithful to commitments. The transformed human person, by God’s grace will even begin to love his or her enemy. All of this is a gift, the work of Jesus Christ in the heart and mind of the believer, the fruit of His death and resurrection. It is not ultimately we who keep the law, but Christ who keeps it in us, if we but let him.

That brings us to today’s gospel: John 13:31-35.

The Gospel today contains a mandate that we should love one another. But there is a danger in thinking  that Jesus is saying that we, with our own unaided flesh power are supposed to do this. This of course seems impossible and leads to frustration if we attempt to do it as our own achievement. As soon as we start trying to love people there is some set back. Perhaps they do something to anger us or cause hurt. Love, if it is human, will likely vanish and be replaced by anger or resentment.  That is why it is important to get this gospel right. Jesus is not telling us to love (which may not last) but to allow him to love others in us. He will use our humanity to effect this love but it’s source will be him.

To understand this we need to consider the gospel in stages. There are three stages to this Gospel.

  1. First there is PREREQUISITE. Jesus indicates that the hour has come for him to be glorified. He is referring to his passion, death and resurrection. In this saving act Jesus acquires for us to power to live a wholly new life. In order for him to command us to love one another he must first equip us to do so. He does this on the cross and in his rising to new life. From the cross and resurrection comes a totally new life for us. As St. Paul puts it, we have been raised to new life with Christ (Col 3:1), and again, If anyone is in Christ he is a new creation (2 Cor 5:17) and yet again that since we have died with Christ in baptism we have also risen with him that we might live in newness of life (Rom 6:4).
  2. Next note the POWER– So it is clear that Christ’s death and resurrection empowers us to live the life he describes in the moral Law of the Sermon on the Mount and throughout the New Testament and in today’s Gospel. Notice how  He gives us a new command but links it to what he has already done in us: Love another as I have loved you. In other words, I have loved you and placed my love in you, now you are able and must discover the power you have to love others. Jesus commands us only because he has first equipped us. It is not our love that must love others, even our enemies, it is His love already placed in us that he asks us to draw on. As St. John puts it, We love because he first loved us (1 John 4:19).
  3. Finally notice the PROOF. Jesus concludes by saying that we will know, that is we will experience, that we are his disciples when we love each other. It is almost as if he is saying, “Try me in this and begin to experience that you DO have this power because you are my follower and some one who has my grace.” So the question for us is ultimately, Do you believe  that the Lord has equipped, empowered and enabled you to love others?

In the end we must remember that we are to live under grace, not the Law (Rom 6:14). This does not mean that there is no law. Rather it means the the Law describes the new life that Christ offers. The keeping of the commandments is not the cause of God’s love in us. Rather it is the result of it. It is but for us to finally grasp and expereince this love and thus be equipped to keep the commandments of the Lord and all they imply.

This video is the high water mark in the movie Fireproof. It is where Caleb finally “gets it.” He has been trying to love his alienated wife out of flesh power and, since she is not responding as well as his ego says she should, he is resentful. But in a moment of grace depicted here he finally experiences the complete and unmerited love of God for him and thus becomes equipped to start loving his wife this way. Would that our lives were as simple as this movie describes, but after this plot had to unfold in 90 minutes. For most of us, finally grasping the love of God for us takes more than one chance conversation in a park. But the central point remains, we have to experience the love of God for us to live more fully under grace. The more we grasp God’s love the more we can keep his law.

Posted on

On Creative Genius and Music as a Kind of Onomatopoeia

A few days ago we discussed whether Angels sing. My own conclusion from the discussion is that there is little or no evidence that Angels sing. About the closest reference is Job 38:7 and even there it is not perfectly clear that they sing. Perhaps the most positive way to state my point is that musical expression is a particular gift and genius of the human person. And our capacity for music is not just to make crude sounds. Rather we are possessed, at least collectively, of creative genius in this regard. The video below illustrates this genius.

Do you remember your grammar and the grammatical term Onomatopoeia? An Onomatopoeia is a word that sounds like the object it describes. Words like oink, meow, Wham! Sizzle, and my personal favorite:”Yackety Yak”

There are times too when music takes up a kind of onomatopoetic quality. In the video below Moses Hogan, one of the great modern arrangers of the old African American Spirituals describes his arrangement of “Joshua Fit the Battle of Jericho.” He has the male and female voices in a frenetic dialogue with lots of staccato notes dominating in the male voices.  This creates the very sound of an intense battle! The song sounds like what it is describing. It’s a kind of “musical onomatopoeia.” There are other aspects of the same concept, you’ll hear the trumpet in the soprano and the battle reach climax in a moment of dissonance. And wait till you hear the walls fall at the very end in a cascade of notes! 

In this three minute video Moses Hogan describes his intent of echoing the sound of a battle and then the song is sung. Enjoy this brilliant and beautiful arrangement of the Spiritual. Admire too the wonderful discipline of the choir that is necessary to execute this spiritual flawlessly.