Mass of Reparation for Notre Dame’s Obama invitation. Wow…
Bishop Thomas Wenski of Orlando is going to lead a Mass of Reparation linked to Notre Dame’s invitation to Obama. This whole thing has truly gone into an alternate universe. The mass is May 3 at 6:00 p.m. in the Cathedral of St. James in downtown Orlando. The announcement says:
As Catholics we are aware of the many shortcomings and transgressions committed against the dignity and sacredness of human life in our world. That is why it is inconceivable that Notre Dame University, a Catholic institution of higher learning, should receive and honor anyone who promotes policies that are contradictory to who we are as a people of faith.
As our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI stated in his visit to the U.S. last year in reference to Catholic university presidents, “to justify positions that contradict the faith and teaching of the church would obstruct or even betray the university’s identity and mission.” …
Come and pray with Bishop Wenski for all of our transgressions against the Gospel of Life.
Reparation is the making amends for a wrong done or for an offense against God. By his death on the cross, the Son of God offered his life out of love for the Father to make reparation for our sinful disobedience (CCC #614).
We are obliged to make reparation for personal sins against justice and truth (CCC #2412 and #2487).
So…what are they making reparation for? Or are they using a mass to point the finger of blame? Amy Welborn tries to put a positive spin on it:
If this were, indeed (as some might read it), a Mass in Reparation for the Sins of Notre Dame..that would be inappropriate and kind of strange. But it seems (seems – I’m just guessing) as if what has happened here is an examination of conscience of sorts.
I’d guess it’s more than that, more like what the announcement says, and indeed kind of strange. As Amy notes, Bishop Wenski is no Burkean Romanist, by any stretch. It also seems clear that there are any number of moments to hold a mass of this sort. And I of course also wonder whether such a mass has been held regarding the abuse crisis.
Apart from the politics of this, ecclesial and political, perhaps others can illuminate the use and rationale of a Mass of Reparation. This does seem inadvisable, to say the least, as it feeds divisions when there is no clear judgment that Notre Dame has committed such serious sin.
I’ve never heard of a “Mass of Reparation”, and I don’t understand the concept. Reparation typically is not a duty we fulfill by celebrating a mass. Reparation = “repair”; it’s supposed to repair the damages and hurts we’ve caused others. E.g. if I steal someone’s car, I repair the damage I’ve caused the original owner by returning the stolen vehicle, or buying her a new one. Going to mass is a good thing, but it isn’t reparation, at least as I understand it.
Hello David (and All),
I’m sure you are already aware of the following but perhaps other participants are not:
http://www.americamagazine.org/content/article.cfm?article_id=11564
This is a link to an April 13 piece in America by Fr. John Kavanaugh I found very useful. Perhaps others here will find Fr. Kavanaugh’s remarks useful as well.
The name is the University of Notre Dame.
NOT Notre Dame University.
David, isn’t that part of the point of this. . .
Doesn’t the Cardinal Newman Society, Donohue, Welborn, WANT people to think that what Notre Dame has done is a serious sin? Just like they wanted people to think that voting for Obama was a serious sin?
On the specifically ND piece, I wonder in all of this is whether the economic crisis has an effect. Five or ten years ago, conservatives were putting their hopes in places like Ave Maria University, which was supposed to be as good as Notre Dame academically, but more “orthodox.” Is part of the problem that that dream has faded?
Hmm, this unraveling of ND’s invite has become more – shall we say – interesting as each week passes. Not even Holy Week and Easter has slowed it down. Indeed, as we inch closer to graduation’s day, it’s become more intense.
Apropos America, however, gotta say I wasn’t too impressed by John Kavanaugh’s piece. The gist of his argument seems right, the argument itself could use some tuning… One of the comments is right that Fr. J is kind of weak on picking on some “James” on Amy Wellborn’s blog.
Ah, here I am on a Commonweal blog responding to a reader’s comment on America website responding to Fr. J who was responding to a reader’s comment on Wellborn’s blog…
Historyman, here’s the problem. James’s may not be the sharpest argument, but it is likely the most prevalent argument Most of the people writing to ND are not Ph.D.’s in theology.
The blogosphere is very much a populist place.
There are many other ways the bishop of Orlando could criticize the president of the United States or the University of Notre Dame without resorting to politicizing the Mass. The Mass is about unity, but this one is about partisan division.
Paul, don’t you think politicizing the mass follows, nearly inevitably from politicizing communion?
“Most of the people writing to ND are not Ph.D’s in theology.”
With all due respect, one does not have to be one of the cast of characters in the “Emperors New Clothes”, to SEE, as in understand, the Truth about the Sanctity of ALL Human Life.
The letters to the Editor in this morning’s NYT Week in Review, a number by Notre Dame grads, show how wide the gap is between the hierarchy and loadsof folks – not only uneducated Catholics.I repeat that the hope for any comon ground just continues to diminish.
To understand this Truth, one must go back to the beginning. Long before there existed democrats and republicans, God created man in His image to live in a Loving relationship with one another in communion with Him, God, who is a relationship of Love.
“Let Us Make Man In Our Image.”- The Blessed Trinity
Nancy. . . you’re missing my point. To put it another way, a Ph.D. (or other terminal degree) is a necessary qualification to teach at Notre Dame, not to criticize it. By the same token, it doesn’t seem to me that Father Kavanaugh is obliged to ignore the general run of criticisms and their tenor in criticizing the effect of the debate on the Church. Amy Welborn’s blog is a pretty good proxy for the general level and tone of the debate.
Pope John Paul II engaged in public reparation for the Church’s complicity in massive social injustices of the past. He sought reparation for sins of commission and omission, for collaboration with, or silence regarding, or even cozying up to the perpetrators. Those perpetrators especially included political leaders sustaining and promoting and advanciong the injustices. If the Church or Church institutions had given honors to and fawning appreciation for the leaders of those injustices and therefore had benefitted from the good opinion of political elites and important people of the time, such public sucking up would be exhibit A in the modern case against the Church’s historical iniquity. The point isn’t whether or not people agree with the Church’s view on the 50 million unborn victims of abortion and the harm to their mothers, or the nature of the unimaginably horrible circumstances of their demise, or on President Obama’s absolutist commitment to the continuation of this injustice in policy and law and government appointments across the board. But just recognize that on the Church’s own terms, there is nothing at all surprising about making reparation for the Catholic universities’ coddling of President Obama. There ought to be little difference in the judgement of Catholic history between honoring him in this way and kissing up to the perpetrators of massive social injustices that are not presently condemned by consensus. Each person should ask him or her self whether or not one can condemn softness from the Church regarding past injustices, and then celebrate that same kind of softness towards the present one, and whether one’s response is guided by consistency and principle or by the not-coincidental alignment of one’s views with the most recent popular trend in fashionable opinion.
I went and read the announcement. I’m not sure this is directed at UND. The university is mentioned in passing on the way to an invitation for everyone to pray. Let us imagine the publicist who wrote this and hoped to get a crowd by mentioning Notre Dame. Impossible? Hmmm!
Here’s the announcement on the Orlando diocesan site:
“All are Invited to the Mass of Reparation
“As Catholics we are aware of the many shortcomings and transgressions committed against the dignity and sacredness of human life in our world. That is why it is inconceivable that Notre Dame University, a Catholic institution of higher learning, should receive and honor anyone who promotes policies that are contradictory to who we are as a people of faith.
“As our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI stated in his visit to the U.S. last year in reference to Catholic university presidents, “to justify positions that contradict the faith and teaching of the church would obstruct or even betray the university’s identity and mission.”
Mass of Reparation
May 3 at 6:00 p.m.
Cathedral of St. James
215 N. Orange Avenue
Downtown Orlando
Come and pray with Bishop Wenski for all of our transgressions against the Gospel of Life.
Reparation is the making amends for a wrong done or for an offense against God. By his death on the cross, the Son of God offered his life out of love for the Father to make reparation for our sinful disobedience (CCC #614).
We are obliged to make reparation for personal sins against justice and truth (CCC #2412 and #2487).
Hello All,
Another Peter V. tangent to a thread (which I hope some here will find of interest)
The affairs at Notre Dame and Georgetown strike me as good illustrations of an amazing lack of unity within the Roman Catholic Church. I’m sure all of us are familiar with the stock “argument” that the existence of thousands of different Protestant denominations is proof that protestantism is somehow defective. But I’ve never yet seen anyone point out that while the Roman Catholic Church is officially united, there is so much diversity among Catholics’ beliefs and practices that a cynic might wonder if we Catholics have much in common at all. As for the Notre Dame affair, I think the recent Commonweal editorial was spot on. One might not approve of the decision of the university to award President Obama an honorary degree (and I don’t approve of the decision), but one need not conclude, as a number of Catholics have concluded, that Satan has taken over the university or even that the university officials had bad motives in extending the invitation to Peresident Obama.
I also don’t think that the disunity I perceive among we Roman Catholics can be chalked up to some of us being “bad” Catholics. But I won’t say more unless anyone here wants to discuss this further.
Peter Vanderschraaf writes:
“But I’ve never yet seen anyone point out that while the Roman Catholic Church is officially united, there is so much diversity among Catholics’ beliefs and practices that a cynic might wonder if we Catholics have much in common at all”.
We have one magisterium, one catechism, one communion. Catholics may disagree among themselves. But like all others, Catholics are sinners also.
I am busy reading Garry Wills’ BARE RUINED CHOIRS. There are some disdainful remarks in it, particularly directed at the common pious practices of ordinary folk. [Not unsurprising from a college boy]. I think I am a contemporary of Mr. Wills and recognize many of the politicians and policies he discusses. But one is overriding: the refusal, the rejection [often vicious] of Humanae Vitae. I do believe to have read that Augustine developed his “take” on original sin as a sexual sin. Seems about right. And the contemporary echo seems about right. For is not the abortion argument ["pro-choice"] based on “I can do what I want about sex. If ‘she’ gets pregnant, that’s her problem”.
Peggy, I think you might be right. That seems plausible.
I thought Augustine developed his “take” on original sin based on the sin of Pride. At the end of the day, who better than the Creator would know the definition of Love?
Hello Cathleen (and All),
“On the specifically ND piece, I wonder in all of this is whether the economic crisis has an effect. Five or ten years ago, conservatives were putting their hopes in places like Ave Maria University, which was supposed to be as good as Notre Dame academically, but more “orthodox.” Is part of the problem that that dream has faded?”
I had the opportunity to think about this while driving to and from Mass this afternoon. What you say strikes as plausible. I wonder if any current participants here have more direct acquaintance with Ave Maria the town and Ave Maria the university? Anyway, I am currently working at UC Merced, a university about as old as Ave Maria and about as early in development as Ave Maria. There is no question that the economic crisis is alraedy having a very serious effect here. The university is freezing its faculty, reducing its staff, and doing everything it can to increase enrollments for the tuition, all of which means less service to an already ill-served student body. For example, the university is now completing its fourth year and will graduate its first class this May, but there is no philosophy major and no timetable for establishing a philosophy major anymore. We are already seeing students leave because they cannot major in the discipline of their choice here.
I have read that Ave Maria the university is already having trouble retaining students, but evidently for a different reason. There are complaints from students there that life at Ave maria is more restrictive than they had expected.
Peter – please see link: http://communio.stblogs.org/2009/01/ave-maria-university-on-the-br.html
In addition, university has been plagued by controversy – see first provost, Joe Fessio, SJ, who did his STD thesis under Ratzinger -
1987 – Fired from his position as Director, St. Ignatius Institute, the University of San Francisco, by Father President, John LoSchiavo, S.J., in a dispute over management of a $1,000,000 donation.
1987 – Peritus at Seventh Ordinary General Assembly of Bishops, at the Vatican, and delivers paper arguing that girls and women be excluded from the offices of Altar Server and Lector at Mass in the Catholic Church
2002 – Founded Campion College of San Francisco and ‘exiled’ from San Francisco by Jesuit Order, although retains leadership of Ignatius Press
2002 – Chancellor, later provost, Ave Maria University
2007 – Fired from his position as provost of Ave Maria University. The reason given publicly was “irreconcilable differences over administrative policies and practices”. He was reinstated as a theologian in residence the next day and remains an ardent supporter of the university. ”
Would suggest that the lack of students and financial werewithal has less to do with today’s situation than with the way the school is run. Rigid, ideological, neo-orthodox, etc.
Some added info: Dormitories are organized into small, same-gender communities. Quiet hours (9-9 on weekdays, 11-10 on weekends) are enforced by residence assistants and adjusted by residence directors. Members of the opposite sex are not permitted in the dorm rooms at any time (with the exception of “open hall” parties which occur approximately once a semester) and must be escorted through the halls. Chapels are located in each of the three dorms and contain an altar for Holy Mass and tabernacles housing the Eucharist perpetually. Members of the clergy, who live on campus, assist in maintaining spiritual life. Televisions are only permitted in common areas, though students are allowed to use their computers to play videos in the dorms and common rooms. Social life on campus includes intramural sports, drama productions, talent shows, excursions, dances, and many other events. Students are encouraged to organize and participate in social and recreational activities. Drinking is only permitted in private quarters, or where deemed appropriate by the residence director(s). Men and women are encouraged to dress in modest attire and to avoid sexually suggestive or revealing attire.
[edit] Liturgy
Mass is offered in the Ave Maria Oratory, the landmark building on campus, which is located in the heart of the new town. The parish serves the town and the university. Traditional liturgical actions are encouraged, including kneeling for communion, the use of Latin, the daily praying of the Angelus (especially at lunch and dinner time, when the Angelus bell is rung at noon and 6pm), the use of incense, and male-only altar servers at Mass. The chaplaincy has issued directives regarding the use of Latin, of the ad orientem posture (the priest facing the altar, the same direction as the congregation), and kneeling for communion. Other Masses are said in English with the priest facing the people.
AveWatch is the univesity blog site.
Here is another blog comment: http://vaticanwatcher.blogspot.com/2008/09/you-cant-make-this-stuff-up.html…….Rice to Monaghan: “.. what you are doing is objectively morally wrong”
» Thu, March 19th, 2009 – 11:11 am CST
The deposition of Charles E. Rice, Esquire was taken on February 4, 2009 as part of the wrongful termination lawsuit filed by three former Ave Maria School of Law professors. Rice is a co-founder of the Law School; he was involuntarily removed from the AMSL Board, and terminated as a Visiting Professor. He is also a Professor Emeritus at Notre Dame Law School. Professor Rice and his memos have been cited frequently on this website and Fumare.
The following excerpts refer to a letter from Rice to Tom Monaghan dated October 15, 2003 after a personal meeting between the two. Click below for more…
Read the rest of this article »
Cult allegation: *Ave Maria University group said to be “a cult”
» Fri, March 13th, 2009 – 7:56 am CST
In Fall 2004, Irish priest Fr. Colum Power arrived at Ave Maria University. According to Power’s biography published by his order:
“In the late seventies and eighties he drifted away from the Catholic faith he grew up in, until at the age of 31, in 1996, he had a strong experience of God that dramatically changed his life. In that same year he felt the call to the priesthood. Seven months later he responded to that call by consecrating himself as a religious in the Servants of the Home of the Mother [HotM]. On the 20th of December 2003 he was ordained a priest.”
Notice the pattern, as we’ll return to it:
drifts away from faith
has dramatic experience and considers vocation
soon joins HotM
After being a priest for less than one year, Power was invited by Ave Maria University to help oversee the vocational discernment of its college students.
How does this happen? How does an immature priest who has yet to fully embark on his own vocation get invited to oversee the incredible responsibility of vocational discernment of youth? Further, how do the Servants of the Home of the Mother – a new “apostolic movement” that lacks canonical certification – get invited to oversee “spiritual direction, retreats, talks and holy hours as well as vocational discernment for men and women” at Ave Maria University (AMU news release; January 3, 2009)?
While it may be true that the Servants of the Home of the Mother (HotM) contribute quite positively to some aspects of the Ave Maria community, there are also some activities that are disturbing. Individuals who have had direct contact with the HotM at Ave Maria report to AveWatch of “aggressive recruiting practices” targeted at the very young and the spiritually immature. These practices appear to be less directed at vocational discernment and more directed toward discernment to enter HotM. One parent, whose child joined HotM and was relocated abroad, considers the organization to be “a cult”. A person at Ave Maria put it this way, “They pretty much work like the Communists do. They go for the ones that are wounded, confused and lack proper Catholic formation.”
We spent years closing down the minor seminary system in the US for reasons that had to do with insularity, healthy psychological development, disadvantages of removing too young kids from family and society. Given all of the recent news about the Legionnaire of Christ and their rules – you have to really wonder about this place.
I’m all for works of reparation/atonement provided they are offered by people for their OWN sins. Put another way “thank you my lord bishop, but I prefer to make my own acts of reparation.”
Hello Gabriel (and All),
“We have one magisterium, one catechism, one communion. Catholics may disagree among themselves. But like all others, Catholics are sinners also.”
You are of course right, but I think the disagreements we Catholics have go beyond who is/is not being faithful to the magisterium and the catechism. I’ll give an admittedly personal example to illustrate. My bride is a member of a web community of Catholics who all share certain views. They disapprove of women serving the celebrant at the altar, reading the Scripture readings of the Liturgy of the Word and serving as Eucharistic ministers. They believe gay men who are celibate should be barred from the priesthood. They believe that celibacy is part of the nature of the priesthood and must therefore always be mandatory for priests. They also are fervent believers in the claims of certain private revelations including the claims from Medugorje and Garabandal.
I, on the other hand, approve of women altar servers, women Eucharistic ministers and the like, and I hope that one day women will again be ordained as deacons. I think that celibacy is a discipline that could in principle be relaxed for candidates for the priesthood. I think gay men who are celibate should continue to be permitted to enter the priesthood. And I don’t believe in the claims of private revelations like the ones from Medugorje and Garabandal.
But while my bride and I obviously have certain respectful disagreements, we are both well within the bounds of Roman Catholic orthodoxy. We both accept all of the dogmas of the Catholic faith and obey all of the moral teachings, including the forever hot-button prohibition against contraception. One might object that we each disagree with certain ways the Church is currently governed, but these matters of governance are not articles of the faith.
You mention Garry Wills, who evidently rejects Humanae Vitae pretty firmly. I think it’s interesting that we even have a sort of meta level disagreement among Catholics. As is well publicized, many Catholics believe that one can disobey the teaching of Humanae Vitae (or fill-in-your-least-favorite-teaching) yet still be a faithful Catholic. (As it happens my bride and I have concluded we can’t disobey Humanae Vitae, so it’s natural family planning for us.)
Maybe the inevitable price for so much diversity of belief and practice among we Catholics is more infighting like we are seeing over the Notre Dame affair. But I’d like to think we will eventually learn to do better than to squabble.
Hello Bill (and All),
Thank you for the information regarding Ave Maria University. Clearly you have had more success learning about this university than have I.
Actually, I’m interested in Ave Maria University and Ave Maria the town for professional reasons. I happen to be very interested in the work of Alasdair MacIntyre, arguably the most influential living Catholic moral philosopher. The people participating in these projects appear to be doing exactly what MacIntyre recommends in his landmark book “After Virtue”, that is, they are creating a grass-roots community and university that will foster Aristotelian virtue in the face of the liberal “barbarians at the gate” who rule Western society (MacIntyre’s words). Even before I learned what you just told us, I was wary of this project. I have asked my own students, in all seriousness, if any of them would like to go to Ave Maria University. Not surprisingly none of my students wants to go there. And I have admitted to them I would not want to work there. And I’ve told my bride I would never send one of our children there.
How Peggy and Cathy can conclude that this is not a knock against Notre Dame is inconceivable to me. But wait that is what Wenski said: “inconceivable.” Why mention Notre Dame at all and just go on to talk about reparation? Notre Dame might give the story legs. But to say it is not a knock on Notre Dame is well…….inconceivable.
Back to ‘reparations’… Ave Maria/Orlando bishop stuff has me glad I left Florida 60 years.[after 9 months]
It was almost all swamp and real estate schemes …anything changed?
If Obama’s visit/honor/talk at ND is such an evil event that public Mass reparations are called for , would not all in attendenceat ND be guilty of serious cooporation with evil? Can we expect more anathemas? Wow, the ‘right’ really knows how to go off road into strange ditches. What do they have as the next act when this ND flap falls flat…. and it will for sure…
Cathleen, you suggested that politicizing communion would inevitably lead to politicizing the mass. Why should we be surprised?
I suspect that most dioceses have at least one “traditional” and one “progressive” parish. Then we have Benedict’s mandate that every bishop provide the Tridentine mass for folks who want it.
“Birds of a feather flock together.” At the risk of overgeneralization, the progressives tend to focus on the social justice teachings of the church as well as issues seen to involve inclusivity, e.g., gay marriage and women’s ordination. The traditionalists, on the other hand, seem to be more focused on maintaining orderliness and upholding authority and established doctrine.
The respective styles of worship — Novus Ordo vs. Tridentine — reflect the different personalities (for lack of better word right now) of these two ecclesial constituencies. One stresses, for example, the common priesthood of the faithful led by priest as presider. The other clearly puts the ordained priest at the fore while the congregation remains in a passive mode.
Rome — like nothing I can remember in my 61 years — clearly has two different ecclesial communities today. The more outspoken of U.S. bishops (Burke, Vasa, Finn, Sheridan, et al) “pushed the envelope” in threatening the laity with the possibility of hellfire and damnation if they were to vote for the Democratic candidate for POTUS. These hierarchs focused on the abortion issue at the expense of every other moral concern. They certainly have not been associated with the social justice efforts of the church.
Likes will associate with likes. The liturgy is no exception.
Hello Joseph (and All),
“Rome — like nothing I can remember in my 61 years — clearly has two different ecclesial communities today.”
I wonder if there are only two such different ecclesial communities today? I’m not sure anymore that one can make a clear distinction between “traditional” and “progressive” Catholics, though the way you try to make the distinction here is quite interesting. I think there are quite a few different “fault lines”, including the liturgical fault line you allude to.
Nevertheless, I think you may well be right that the Catholic Church will gradually segregate into parishes whose members have increasingly less in common and have relatively little interaction. You are right to note that like attracts like. The Nobel Laureate Thomas Schelling proved back in the 1970s that if individuals have a preference to interact with some others similar to themselves, they will spontaneously segregate even if none of them are prejudiced against others who are different. One way to prevent this happening to the Church would be to start rigorously enforcing a requirement that one register in and attend the parish nearest one’s home. But I doubt very much that anyone wants this, including Benedict himself. I think part of the intent behind granting universal permission for the Tridentine Mass was to allow people who want to participate in this Mass to be able to do so even if it means traveling a fair distance to the parish that provides it.
Bill, I think it’s a knock on ND. . . . I just think it’s possible it’s not a knock by the Bishop, but rather by someone writing copy for him.
Peter, I am wondering, do you believe the message of Fatima or do you think the apostasy that exists within the Catholic Church is merely a coincidence?
A Sunday Mass of Reparation (expiation, atonement) two weeks before the UND commencement is just a coincidence. I think not. And the bishop just went along with the mention of the ND commencement because a publicist thought it a good idea to attract Massgoers. I think not. And the Bishop of Orlando. according to Amy Welborn, is not a “raging conservative.” I would have to see her criteria for episcopal “raging conservatives.” Maybe not “raging,’ whatever that signifies, but certainly not a moderate.
Why not a Mass of Reparation on the feast of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (this year, Friday, 19 June, or the Sunday afterwards). Like me, some may be old enough to remember The Act of Reparation to the Sacred Heart recited at Benediction on First Fridays. I paraphrase a bit without the text, with its ringing periodic sentences: “Many indeed have never known Thee; many indeed, despising Thy precepts, have abandoned Thee. Bring them back to Thy Father’s house lest they die of wretchousness and hunger along the way.” A stirring prayer and still quite memorable.
Hello Nancy (and All),
“I am wondering, do you believe the message of Fatima ”
No. But I will grant that the reports regarding Fatima are somewhat more credible than most.
“or do you think the apostasy that exists within the Catholic Church is merely a coincidence?”
Yes, at least with respect to the reports of Marian apparitions. I think predictions associated with reports of Marian apparitions are directly analogous to predictions of an immanent downturn in the stock market – there are so many of them reported all of the time that when something really does happen a few predictions are bound to be “proved” right.
That said I appreciate that many Catholics believe in the authenticity of some reports of Marian apparitions. At the same time, no claimed private revelation is an article of the Catholic faith. So assuming you believe in the message of Fatima, you and I can both be in good standing with the Catholic Church although we disagree in at least one area. (I’m in good standing and I am sure you are as well.) If I am right then you and I are illustrating the point I was trying to make in my earlier posts here.
I could have been clearer. That’s what happens when you attempt to write well after the point when “the day is far spent.” A public Mass of Reparation for societal and private sin is one thing. But I think it tendentious and provocative to link it to and schedule it in view of Notre Dame’s commencement. As well, I think such a Mass is out of place on a Sunday of the Easter season. Surely the most highly privileged season of the liturgical year.
Sounds to me as if the reparators are making a mockery of the Mass.
The Fatima reports “more credible than most”? Not if they are examined closely.
Well, I try to think of the Georgetown incident in conjunction with the Florida bishop incident. I think people are wrong to interpret G-town in the worst possible light, so I’m trying not to do that to the Bishop.
Peter, much of my work is inspired by MacIntre-but not so much the end of After Virtue (I once told him I had no intention of going anywhere that doesn’t have hair driers and electricity and really good heating systems), but the middle–on virtues and practices, and tradition. I also use Whose Justice Which Rationality–to talk about conversation between traditions.
I raised the question above about what the announcement intended because the headline on this post reads: “Mass of Reparation for Notre Dame’s Obama invitation. Wow…”
That’s not what the announcement says. I went to look because my impression is that Bishop Wenski is not nuts and if this had been a Mass of Reparation for UND, I was going to rag a mutual friend of his and mine. On reading it, I thought I’d pass up the chance to tease becuase I don’t think it’s condemening UND, though as Bill Mazella writes it could be taken for a knock. So no fun there.
I posted my comment above because while the Right has gone to heaven on the Georgetown stage production and has been proven wrong, the Moderate Left might want to take a more fact-based approach. Just a thought.
Peter, I think you make valid points about more than one fault line. I was referring to what perhaps can be considered the “major” fault line. (Think here of a faultline map of the SF Bay Area :)
And, I guess we should not overlook those “centrist” Catholics who likely make up a big jumble of attitudes and opinions (or none of same :) and tend to avoid the liberal-conservative brouhaha!
And, finally, we have those Catholics who have formally or informally left the institutional Catholic Church but still embrace Catholicism, either of a Vatican II or Vatican I perspective.
Truly an ecclesial mess!
I think Mrs. Steinfels is corect that Bishop Wenski is not a nut (I also infer and concur that there are some bishops who act nutty), but…
as in our discussion of Bishop Zubik below, will reparation and asking for forgiveness mean better unity, reconciliation, charity and all the other good things we talk about, given the multiple “fault lines?”
I had the same reaction to the actual wording of the announcement as Peggy did. The Mass of Reparation announcement looked to me like boilerplate, into which somebody inserted the knock against Notre Dame. It’s a serious matter, and it presumably is there with the bishop’s permission (he hasn’t pulled it) but, knowing what diocesan bureaucracies are like, I don’t presume the bishop initiated it or is particularly hot to trot on condemning ND. No letter. No mention on the liturgy page of the website. No other statement. This has all the hallmarks of an intervention by the right to life committee or something similar. If I may go further in my hypothetical reconstruction, it might even be a compromise: right to life advocates press him to make a statement, write a letter, denounce Notre Dame. He says no. Well, can we at least insert a reference in the annual Mass of Reparation? Approval given.
The result is awful, of course. But I am awaiting further elucidation as to what was actually intended, and by whom, before putting the bishop of Orlando into the same basket with the bishop of Lincoln Nebraska. The day of reparation instituted by the American bishops some years ago has not, as yet (to my knowledge), been turned into a political tool. I think this incident may be an unfortunate precedent, however, and should be considered carefully for that reason.
“I don’t presume the bishop initiated it or is particularly hot to trot on condemning ND. No letter. No mention on the liturgy page of the website. No other statement. ”
Hi, Rita, just an FYI – a few minutes ago, when I clicked on the first link provided by David G. in the original post above, it now lands at a statement by Bishop Wenski on the Notre Dame invitation.
http://www.orlandodiocese.org/who_we_are/bishop_wenski/columns/200904_und.php
Quite a bit of it seems to be more or less the standard talking points. But there are also some glimmers of even-handedness.
Thanks, Jim. The situation becomes clearer. Yes, the standard talking points, minus the drama of outrage. It seems there is some over-interpreting of the pope’s remarks at work here, however. Notre Dame did not endorse a position contrary to the Catholic one.
Forgive me for pressing this point, but I’m still not wild over a “Mass of Reparation” for this event. I guess my issue is that reparation, istm, is not that well understood as it is, and I don’t know if it’s helpful to infer that attending a mass “gets us off the hook” for the reparation we owe for our “transgressions against the Gospel of Life.”
By way of comparison, Bishop Zubik called his liturgy a “Service of Apology”. Many commenters here immediately pointed out that, as nice as it was, much more can and should be done for victims of abuse. Bishop Zubik is not, by virtue of publicly apologizing, thereby off the hook. To my mind, a similar line of reasoning applies here: the mass in Orlando is good as far as it goes, but is it enough, and can more be done?
Or, to draw another comparison: several years ago, there was a political movement to extract reparation from the government and corporations, to be paid to the descendants of slaves in the US. Would a mass suffice in the view of these proponents of reparation? I doubt it.
“Service of Apology”, “Mass of Repentance”, or, to pull the name of an actual mass from the missal, “Mass for Forgiveness of Sins” would be more appropriate. And then, after that, would be the time to reflect on what tangible, concrete steps can be taken to make reparation to the many victims, living and dead, of our offenses against the Gospel of Life. In my very humble and amateur opinion.
I certainly did not intend to suggest that Bishop Thomas Wenski is a “nut.” If I was uncharitable for saying that the bishop is not a moderate, I apologize. In omnibus caritas. My concern is that this event was suddenly put onto the diocesan calendar several days ago. Usualy major diocesan events, however the Mass should be styled, are announced weeks,if not months in advance. This is in no sense an annual event in the diocese. Why then has it been scheduled this year, and in early May?
Also, the prayer that I referred to should be The Act of Consecration (not Reparation) to the Sacred Heart. I have seen the text now, and my memory was very faulty, to say nothing of my spelling (“wretchedness”). With my one-finger typing, always hitting the key to the left rather than the one I was aiming for, I am terribly conscious of the time limit. Several of my priceless contributions have disappeared on hitting “submit.” One kind reader explained how to get around this, but it was beyond me.
For example –”usually”
John Page, when I wrote the Sourcebook for Sundays and Seasons 2006, I remember coming across a day that had been designated by the US bishops as a day of reparation for sins against life. It was a weekday, if I recall correctly, and I thought it was in the spring, but I don’t actually remember when and looking quickly through my sources, I can’t seem to put my finger on it. More likely it was in Ordinary Time. Maybe one of the priests who reads this blog will know. Anyway, I appreciate your comment about Sunday Liturgy, and I don’t want it to get lost. I agree with your concern. And I don’t know that this is an annual event at this diocese, either. My remarks above were hypothetical. Just to clarify.
Let none of your priceless contributions be lost!
“Catholic Church will gradually segregate into parishes whose members have increasingly less in common and have relatively little interaction”.
For a small taste of this from a sociological (terribly so, I’m afraid) perspective, read “Sense of the Faithful” by Jerome Baggett.
“-there are so many of them reported all of the time that when something really does happen a few predictions are bound to be “proved” right.”
Peter, let’s hope that the part of the message of Fatima where Our Lady states, “In the end, my Immaculate Heart will Triumph”, happens sooner, rather than later.
P.S., I am familiar with the blogger James. It would not surprise me if he/she is a “straw man”, like Roe in Roe v.Wade.
When I see this hand wringing over “politicization” of the Mass, I wonder where this concern was when Bishop Gumbleton almost weekly gave homilies that were at least as political. Why wasn’t that a mockery? It is not “politicization” that concerns people, it is the kind of politicization. If you believe the Church and its bishops should stay out of politics, then the principle should apply regardless of what those politics are. You can’t have it both ways.
When my bishop marched and made a speech during immigration rallies last year, I didn’t agree politically with everything he said, but I accept that he did this in his role as a shepherd, and in an attempt to teach and preach the Faith. Why can’t we accept that Bishop Wenski is doing this in good faith?
Sean Hannaway: Let’s say it’s good faith, and I think perhaps it is. But what if it is bad politics? We can say the bishops are being “prophetic” and they should being dumping on UND no matter what, or we can say that though being “prophetic,” they are throwing away what little authority they have. Long haul: this is eroding their authority and destroying the pro-life movement to boot.
“they are throwing away what little authority they have. long haul:this is eroding their authority and destroying the pro-life movement to boot.”
Long haul: As long as there is a Catholic Church, (until the end of Time) there will be a Pro-Life Movement and a Pro-Marriage and the Family Movement. If the shoe fits, you should wear it.
margaret,
You might be rifght. I don’t think so. The leadership of the bishops over the last 30 years hasn’t exactly increased their authority or helped the pro-life movement very much, so maybe a change is in order. But, you may be right.
My point was less about that than the rhetoric and argument, as i so often see on this blog, that people like Bishop Wenski are somehow violating some “neutral” principle that should offend all Catholics. They say he is injecting “politics” in the mass, but what they really object to is that he is injecting “conservative politics” in the mass – at least from their perspective. I never see objections to priests or bishops injecting “politics” into the faith if those politics happen to be progressive politics.
When people say this is a mockery, or that it abuses the mass – that’s a serious accusation. I just think it is disengenuous argument to make such an accusation based on a “neutral” principle and it assumes bad faith. When someone like Bishop Gumbleton explicitly preached regarding the statute of limitations in abuse cases, that’s explicitly political, but I also understand he is trying to teach something about the faith and responsibility and accountability – I just disagree with him. I wouldn’t say what he did was a mockery of the mass, however.
Rita’s original post raised some questions in my mind.
It seems clear to me that the right to life movement has a lot of weight with our hierarchy and they can easily influence decisions that may not be very good politically (like the FOCA postcard campaign.)
At what point, I would ask, does that influence become inordinate (especially if the life issue is the one issue approach?)
A second question is the motivation of that influence.
To what extent is political affiliation wrapped into the right to life leadership? And while it’s easy to wrap oneself in the mantle of principle (as the song in La Mancha goes “I.m only thinking of him.”) and because others will try to respond hopefully charitably in all things, still is there not an interplay of political/ideolgical in this foofaraw?
Several have noted that the torture/war president didn’t generate this kind of reaction.
This of course leads to further defense from the right to life movement.
I guess my sense is that just as much as principle, politics plays an enormous role in this push against the Obama honoring and poor F. Jenkins.
The term “mockery of a mass” bothers me. I think tha’s an awful overstatement of how Church leadership can misuse the most sacred things to accheive an at least questionable political goals.
Nancy sez: “As long as there is a Catholic Church, (until the end of Time) …”
Msgr. John Tracy Ellis sez: “Jesus’ promise that the church would always endure does not necessarily mean that it will endure everywhere.”
For those of you still following at home, I just heard back from Carol Brinati, communication director of the Diocese of Orlando. I e-mailed her to ask whether the Mass of reparation was intended as a response to Notre Dame’s invitation to President Obama. Her reply:
La Croix has an article on this today, in which Commonweal is mentioned: http://www.la-croix.com/article/index.jsp?docId=2371271&rubId=4078
I’m ready to concede the point–though as a former headline writer myself, the top of the post does seem to overstate the claim, which as I read Ms. Brinati is that UND was one among many transgressions.
And it would still be nice to know exactly how Bishop Wenski would state this, but presumably he’s now painted into a corner. Too bad.
Nancy: I’ll bite … what exactly IS the apostasy that exists in the Catholic Church?
I posit apostasy to mean the purposeful abandonment of one’s religious faith, NOT someone else’s belief that one has done so.
Merci beaucoup, Joseph O’Leary. It’s a good article, too.
By the way, I found interesting Harry Byrne’s reminiscences from his years as a pastor dealing with politicians and some less-than-adroit pro-life activists. The final story is worth the whole column: http://harryjbyrne.blogspot.com/2009/04/pro-life-house-is-divided.html
Nancy, look what happened to the anti-usury movement. Actually, where is it when we need it!
It would be wrong to leave this thread without referncing the current prin tCoomonweal ans William Pfaff’s “Consumed by Zeal” andJustus George Lawler’s skewering of george Weigel,”Phantom Heresies.”
While Isuspect e’ll here mopre asND commencemen tapproaches, I have little hope that we’ll get any more than the blather we’ve seen already -and a pity that some Bishops are part of that or at least tap dance to the tune.
Cathleen, trust me, I can relate. My son, Mike, has a habit of overdrawing his account and ends up paying $31.79 for a taco at Taco Bell. Usary appears to be alive and doing well, although I no longer have sympathy for Mike.