Pope Francis's inaugural Mass is unique in several respects.
That's raised a lot of questions: Only some cardinals doing the act of obedience? Different Mass readings? The Gospel reading in Greek? No offertory procession? No Communion distributed by the pope?
What does all this mean about the pope and where he stands on liturgy?
Is he striking out on a radical new course?
Let's take a deep breath . . . and a closer look at these differences.
1) Only Some Cardinals Doing the Act of Obedience?
This change is not as strange as you might think.
The last time a pope had this kind of Mass (when Pope Benedict had his in 2005) they didn't have all the cardinals present make the sign of obedience, only some of them (together with some non-cardinals).
Each of the cardinals has, already and individually, signified his obedience to Pope Francis. This happened back during the conclave, before his election was announced.
It has been customary to have the cardinals do the same thing publicly at the inauguration Mass (at least all of the cardinals there), but there is precedent for omitting this (and with Pope Benedict, who has a strong respect for liturgical precedent).
I was surprised that this got changed at the last minute, since it overturns a decision Pope Benedict had made just last month, but that's Pope Francis's call.
So now they're going to have just six cardinals (two cardinal bishops, two cardinal priests, and two cardinal deacons) do the homage.
I also don't know that we need to see it as much of an indication of where he stands on liturgy, for this reason: We already know (see below) that they're trying to keep this Mass from running too long. It's already expected to run over two hours.
Having over a hundred cardinals come up and do the act of homage would really lengthen it.
Since the new pope is seventy-six and cameras will be trained on him every minute of the Mass, with at least some reporters eager to spin an "Is the new pope too old to do his job?" narrative, I think it's understandable that they would want not to lengthen the Mass lest his strength flag publicly during the service.
(And it's not like he can grab a quick cup of maté during the service if he needs some caffeine.)
So they're defaulting back to the kind of precedent set by Pope Benedict's inaugural Mass.
2) Different Mass readings?
The Holy See has announced:
The Mass will be that of the Solemnity of St. Joseph, which has its own readings (therefore they are not directly related to the rite of the Inauguration of the Pontificate).
At first it seems odd that they would use the ordinary readings of the day (for the Solemnity of St. Joseph) rather than the readings specifically for the inauguration Mass.
Here is something that may be going on: Pope Francis has a special devotion to St. Joseph, who was represented on his coat of arms before and is now represented on his papal coat of arms. He may view the timing of his inauguration on St. Joseph's day as providential, and he wants to honor St. Joseph.
3) The Gospel Reading in Greek?
One should not view this as the pope dissing Latin. They're going to be using lots of Latin in this Mass.
As papal spokesman Fr. Lombardi noted:
“Latin,” Fr. Lombardi said, “is already abundantly present in the other prayers and Mass parts.”
Furthermore, they announced:
The Gospel will be proclaimed in Greek, as at the highest solemnities, to show that the universal Church is made up of the great traditions of the East and the West.
Proclaiming the Gospel in Greek is not an innovation here. It's something they already do on special occasions to show the Church's universality.
So it's in accord with precedent.
It's also not surprising that they would exercise this option here since this is already a Solemnity (St. Joseph's day), since it's a very solemn Mass (a papal inauguration), since Pope Francis has for years been an ordinary for Eastern Catholics in Argentina (Greek being a primary liturgical language in the East), and--in an extraordinary ecumenical gesture that hasn't happened in almost 1,000 years--the Patriarch of Constantinople (Bartholomew I) is going to be attending.
Given that conjunction of facts, I'd say exercising the existing precedent of doing the Gospel in Greek is reasonable.
Also, one can be enthusiastic about Latin without being unenthusiastic about Greek. It is, after all, the language in which we have the New Testament.
4) No Offertory Procession?
Here they were clear about the reason:
Fr. Lombardi said that the Master of Celebrations [Msgr. Guido Marini] expects that the ceremony will not last much more than two hours and, always with the intention of simplification and not making the rite overly long, there will not be an Offertory procession. The Eucharistic gifts will be brought to the altar by the ministers who prepare the altar.
This is, again, an option provided for in the liturgy. There is no requirement that the faithful (rather than the altar ministers) be the ones to bring up the gifts.
The General Instruction of the Roman Missal states:
73. At the beginning of the Liturgy of the Eucharist the gifts which will become Christ’s Body and Blood are brought to the altar. . . .
The offerings are then brought forward. It is a praiseworthy practice for the bread and wine to be presented by the faithful.
And the rubrics for Mass state
22. It is desirable that the faithful express their participation by making an offering, bringing forward bread and wine for the celebration of the Eucharist and perhaps other gifts to relieve the needs of the Church and of the poor.
So it's praiseworthy and desirable for the faithful to do this, but not mandatory, and in view of the length of the Mass, the pope has chosen not to exercise this option this time.
5) No Communion Distributed by the Pope?
Now for the big one:
Also, the Pope will not distribute Communion, which will be done by the deacons on the “Sagrato” and, in the various areas of the piazza, by priests.
Of all the modifications to Pope Francis's inaugural Mass, this one is likely to cause the most concern.
Some may think of the passage in Redemptionis Sacramentum that says:
[157.] If there is usually present a sufficient number of sacred ministers for the distribution of Holy Communion, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion may not be appointed. Indeed, in such circumstances, those who may have already been appointed to this ministry should not exercise it. The practice of those Priests is reprobated who, even though present at the celebration, abstain from distributing Communion and hand this function over to laypersons.
But that's not what Pope Francis is doing. He's not handing over the function to lay persons. Priests and deacons are ordinary ministers of Holy Communion, not extraordinary ones.
Further, when there is a good reason, a celebrant can have extraordinary ministers distribute Communion in his stead. The next thing the document says is:
[158.] Indeed, the extraordinary minister of Holy Communion may administer Communion only when the Priest and Deacon are lacking, when the Priest is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason, or when the number of faithful coming to Communion is so great that the very celebration of Mass would be unduly prolonged.
This text envisions the possibility of the celebrant not distributing Communion because he "is prevented by weakness or advanced age or some other genuine reason."
Is there such a reason here?
Given Pope Francis's age, he might not want to be forced to stand for the amount of time it would take him to distribute Communion to the enormous number of people who would want to receive from him.
I mean, if I were in Rome for a pope's inaugural Mass and he were distributing Holy Communion, I know which Communion line I would get in!
There can be other reasons, too.
For example, lots of important government officials, including heads of state, are going to be there, and many of them are not where they need to be on issues like abortion, homosexual "marriage," and a host of other issues.
These individuals have not been invited to the Mass. They're coming on their own:
To date, delegations of various sizes and levels from 132 countries have confirmed their attendance.
The Holy See has thus adopted a policy of not inviting but not refusing political leaders from this Mass.
But that policy could be playing a role in the pope's decision not to distribute Communion here.
Does he really want photos of him being published giving Communion to a pro-abort or pro-homosexual "marriage" politician to the folks in that politician's country?
In particular, does he want a photo of him giving Communion to the pro-homosexual "marriage" president of Argentina--Cristina Fernández de Kirchner--with whom he has had a publicly confrontational relationship?
It might be, in view of this, that he judged it better not to distribute Communion rather than be confronted with the options of giving them Communion or publicly refusing them Communion at his inauguration Mass.
Pope Francis may, indeed, deal with such politicians in the future. We may get a clarification of Canon 915 during the reign of Pope Francis. But he may have decided that his inaugural Mass is not the place to do that.
And so he may have made a decision similar to the one that Jesus made in allowing Judas to come to the Last Supper, where the betrayer was not kicked out and would ultimately bear responsibilities for his actions before God.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it doesn't seem that we have special reason to be concerned about these aspects of Pope Francis's inaugural Mass.
None of them indicate that he's a liturgical radical.
If you or I were pope (God forbid), we might make different choices, but it is easy to point to precedent and options in the law that support them.
As we're learning about Pope Francis, I'm reading tea leaves as much as anybody in looking at his early actions in office, but these particular choices do not seem to signal a dramatic departure from the course that recent popes have charted on liturgy.
What Now?
If you like the information I've presented here, you should join my Secret Information Club.
If you're not familiar with it, the Secret Information Club is a free service that I operate by email.
I send out information on a variety of fascinating topics connected with the Catholic faith.
In fact, the very first thing you’ll get if you sign up is information about what Pope Benedict said about the book of Revelation.
He has a lot of interesting things to say!
If you’d like to find out what they are, just sign up at www.SecretInfoClub.com or use this handy sign-up form:
Just email me at jimmy@secretinfoclub.com if you have any difficulty.
In the meantime, what do you think?
Comments
Post a Comment
This is misleading for a couple of reasons:
1. This Mass was composed months ago (as you state), so the liturgical goodness of certain areas is not to Pope Francis’ credit.
2. All the exceptions you cite may have practical reasons, but they are all (every one of them) movements away from liturgical goodness.
3. This is his inaugural Mass. We will learn nothing about Francis’ liturgical program (if he has one) until 2014. Recall that Benedict used that odd JP2 processional cross for awhile before ditching it. We’ll see if he cans Marini, etc. Too soon to tell.
But we do know this—Francis has given zero indication—zero—that the legitimate concerns of the conservative Right are unwarranted.
This was a very illuminating article! :D
Thank you so much for your insight!
Most significantly, His Holiness the Ecumenical Patriarch (“the first among equals” of the Orthodox) attended - the first time this has happened since the schism of 1054. So too, were many other Orthodox Patriarchs. Just wonderful! Deus Paxum
I was so worried about getting a new pope, but as soon as I read about the new pope and the things he said I knew that God had answered my prayers. I like your article because it shows that there is a lot of ways to doing things with many different reasons. I want to learn more about this part of Catholicism. I wish I understood all the things that were presented in this article.
Thank you for this posting. It’s a good way to say “everyone just step back and take a chill pill”.
The installation Mass has just concluded and it was a very beautiful, dignified liturgy.
Viva il Papa!
In the EF Solemn High Papal Mass, the Pope does not distribute Holy Communion. Perhaps that’s a reason (just like there’s no Offertory procession in the EF, either).
“Does he really want photos of him being published giving Communion to a pro-abort or pro-homosexual “marriage” politician to the folks in that politician’s country?”
“In particular, does he want a photo of him giving Communion to the pro-homosexual “marriage” president of Argentina—Cristina Fernández de Kirchner”
I don´t think this is a valid reason. If he were so concerned about this could he not have just told her that they shouldn´t take communion unless they repent?
Excellent article! Clarifying and with common sense, we need much more of it!
Amazing information!! Thank you so much
I was so excited to hear Pope Francis mention the importance of creation care SIX TIMES during his homily at the Inaugural Mass!
“Please, I would like to ask all those who have positions of responsibility in economic, political and social life, and all men and women of goodwill: let us be ‘protectors’ of creation, protectors of God’s plan inscribed in nature, protectors of one another and of the environment.”
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2013/03/19/pope:_homily_for_inaugural_mass_of_petrine_ministry_[full_text]/en1-674758
Jimmy - Your final reason for #5 seems the most reasonable and in line with this man’s approach. PaulDavid - Christ tell us to go privately to someone who is wrong. He is a wise “papa” not to have such a public confrontation while the whole world is watching. (Already the US media is “condensing” and forming the public’s impression of his homily.) Jesus gave Judas every opportunity, even after he betrayed Him, to seek forgiveness and his unlimited mercy. Let the Judas’ come to the celebration and pray that their hearts will be changed.
Well done, Jimmy! Thank you for this article. You were able to anticipate and answer all my questions.
The last point is well-made. It is an act of prudence to keep the Pope from having to publicly sort out the worthy from the unworthy among the political elites- he may know his own political leaders by sight but not the whole world- so now that he is representing the universal Church he should not appear to be singling out a few politicians and giving other politicians an apparent endorsement. This is a smart move- being wise as serpents and gentle as doves as Scripture advises.
I am a new Catholic and have only seen papal Masses on You Tube, alas. My son is a new altar server and was so excited to see so many altar servers. But my question is - are the people on the altar “regular men” serving on the altar or are they priests serving on the altar? Even in the photo above, the man on the right and the man directly behind the Pope have priest collars that are red (I’m assuming to signify they are Cardinals) but the man on the left has a fancier robe but no collar. Sorry if this question sounds goofy - I’m just not sure who to ask since there don’t seem to be an traditionalists in my parish.
As an Orthodox Christian it appears to me that the Roman Catholic Church is dividing up liturgically into a Low Church and High Church, with the new pope - at least based upon his actions since his election - falling into the former category. I suppose time will tell if my appraisal of the situation is correct or not.
Very informative, thank you for the article.
We should get a clarification of Catholic Canon 915 based on Catholic Canon 750, and the fact that Holy Father Benedict
made a statement in February that those persons who deny the essence of God, deny the inherent Dignity of the human person created in The Image and Likeness of God, thus to deny the inherent personal and relational Dignity of the human person, who, from the moment of conception, has been created in The Image and Likeness of God, equal in Dignity, while being complementary as male or female, is to deny God. Those who profess to be Catholic, but deny the personal and relational essence of the human person, are apostates to our Faith.
I’m a Catholic who tends to have more traditional leanings while longing to have all of our Christian brethern (protestant and orthodox) solidly re-united one day. I never once feared that Pope Francis erred liturgically, but thanks for explaining anyway, Mr. Akin.
they are all (every one of them) movements away from liturgical goodness.
1) The proclamation of the Gospel in Greek has always been part of the Papal High Mass, both old and new.
2) The Offertory Procession is an option. I agree with why it was left out in this case.
3) RE the Pope not distributing Communion: personally, I would have preferred a limited number of invited communicants to have come forward. But I can also see why the Pope delegated it to other priests and deacons - a perfectly legitimate practice.
Karyn, the man on the right in the magenta cassock is Msgr Guido Marini, the Papal Master of Ceremonies. He is a priest but his job is to serve as the MC at Masses- making sure people are doing what they are supposed to do, helping the Mass flow smoothly. The other guy in magenta is probably another MC. So they are not “celebrants” of the Mass, but are functioning in a “server” role.
The man on the left is wearing a dalmatic, which indicates he is a deacon and he is serving as a deacon in the Mass.
The first time ever that we could watch a papal inauguration around the world was in 2005. The first time we can all, from the comfort of our homes, sit and compare one inauguration with the previous one is 2013. Next time round it’ll be worse, because it’ll be in 3D, and we’ll be able to “poke” the pope every time he does something not to our satisfaction.
Jimmy,
The cross the Holy Father carried contained NO CORPUS!
Did anyone else see this?
Is there a tradition/precedent for the Pope to carry a “Protestant-looking” plain cross, or any advice against it?
Thank you.
Seejay,
As I have always understood it, bishops traditionally and usually do not have a corpus on the pectoral cross they carry. The reason behind this is supposedly to remind them that they must become the body that is sacrificed for the Church and their diocese.
There once was a time when being Pope or bishop was a certain death sentence (look at what happened to all of the apostles) and “Go, and take up your cross” was often very literally true.
@ Ryan
Please do not worry too much. It is usually not very productive to be “more Catholic than the Pope!”
Brannen,
re Seejay,
your response makes a lot of sense even if there may be other reasons.
It is uniquely Catholic to carry Crosses with the corpus on it. Especially given Pope Francis 1 admonition that Chritianity without the Cross with reduce the church to a mere NGO.
I’m sure no harm was intented by our dear Holy Father Pope Francis.
Thanks BRannen and judi, but just to clarify…
It was not the pectoral cross (the one worn on a chain around the neck) but rather the “full sized” processional cross that the Pope carries (remember JPII’s “bended crucifix” style?). Francis’ had NO CORPUS on it…instead it appeared there was a lamb image on it.
So I was just wondering about the meaning and implications of the Vicar of Christ abandoning the crucifix here in favor of a “Protestant-style” cross.
Does anyone know the precedent on this? My own recollection is that ALL popes would have carried crosses with the corpus…but maybe I am wrong.
Ok CORRECTION
In searching I found online photos of both:
Benedict XVI carrying the cross originally of Pius XI which is ornate but with no corpus…
And a statue of Pope St. Sylvester carrying a “triple barred cross” just plain with the three bars.
So it appears to be “kosher.” I must be on sleep deprivation…
Viva il Papa!
I was a little disappointed with the Pope’s homily. His emphasis on creation could be taken as a plus for environmentalists and little else. I liked his referrals to the poor, but wish he also could have taken a more pro-life stand (in his creation remarks). Since many dignitaries attend this Mass, it would have been perfect for him also to defend the family against unnatural forces (such as gay marriage). It would have made them uncomfortable, but too bad. To me, it was bland, and I sure hope that he won’t be afraid to step on peoples toes in the future. Abortion and same sex marriage directly affect the poor too. I do like him entreating the world’s bishops and priests to live a humbler life. Many bishops don’t need a large residence to live in while some people are hard pressed to even hold on to their homes if they have one.
While I appreciate this article, it reminds me of the Pharisees that followed Jesus, questioning why His apostles did not wash their hands ceremonially, before they ate.
So far, with what little I’ve seen of Pope Francis, I like him. The real proof of the pudding will be if he begins to insist that his bishops (and their pastors around the world) Preach and Teach the New Testament Epistles, in their fullness and in context, and in a verse-by-verse fashion, on Sundays at Mass. Use the 7 minute homilies to really equip Catholics to be salt and light in our world, and about matters of eternal value.
This life is not all there is. So while a liturgy is important, we’re told God wants us to know & to love Him. He doesn’t want surface worship that looks good to spectators.
Thank you, Elaine. I recognized Marini from Pope Francis’ first appearance but was unsure who the people are that do not have a collar. Thanks for clarifying.
I am getting sick and tired of hearing this phrase “Pharisee” and “More Catholic Than the Pope” every time somebody makes even a constructive observation or a critical remark. It was my understanding that when the Pope Emeritus put out his Moto Proprio last month, it was to be carried out PERIOD. It is called OBEDIENCE. It was NOT Pope Francis’s call as Jimmy tries to say because at that time he was still the Pope and wanted a return to Tradition which he himself did not do back in 2005. The lame argument that it would take too much time is bogus since the whole ceremony took 4 hours anyway. And of course no mention is made of Roger Mahoney’s continuing on despite the fact that he tweeted some nasty things about Benedict over the weekend. I am being more “Catholic Than The Pope”
Jannet O’Connor, I liked your post. With Pope Francis doing away with this and that I fear he is setting a precedent of whats to come. In the 70’s I cringed at all the talk of reform, change, updating ect… I fear we are headed towards another round of freak changes. In Cardinal Mahoney’s tweet he rejoiced, “no more lace albs, no more ermine capes”,he also tweeted that simplified Masses are beautiful. One certain person responded to him, “Simplified Masses are like an ugly baby. We say the Masses are beautiful, only as to not hurt anyones feelings. Though the baby be truly a miracle, the baby remains nevertheless ugly!”. To me the so called simplified Masses are UGLY! Why can’t we give to God sacred beauty. Many turned things ugly in the name of Vatican ll, even though the Council never asked for such banality.
Ms. O’Connor - I’m sorry that you seem to be embracing (ironic or not) the moniker you profess to be hearing. I agree with Jimmy completely - His Holiness has the freedom and the right to make changes and adjustments in his own installation Mass as he sees fit. You just don’t agree with him. You state that the “whole cremony” ttok four hours? Really? What channel were you watching? The Mass itself was two hours long and full coverage of everything - before, during and after - on EWTN lasted three hours. Colleen Carroll Campbell signed off shortly after 6:30am EDT. I love Pope Francis and I think he made wise choices.
To your last thought re: Cardinal Mahoney - Why would Jimmy’s article even mention him or any tweeting he’s done? The piece was not about him in any way. Jimmy does a good job of staying on topic.
Ryan,
Maybe you should worry more about being authentically Catholic and less about being a member of the “conservative Right.” Only one of those groups has the guidance of the Holy Spirit and is protected from error.
Rosemarie, agree with your comments - he missed a good chance to stress protecting the unborn and weak with all those pro-abortion politicians there. Good article, Jimmy. I thought the same thing you did on why he did not distribute Holy Communion. I can just see the headlines and picture of one of the pro-abortion politicans from US receiving the Eucharist.
In church history, there have been laity and clergy “more Catholic than the pope” - when the Borgia was pope and the anti-popes.
We should be concerned that on page 20 of the Inauguration Booklet, The Filioque is missing and needs to be restored!
http://www.ewtn.com/popefrancis/election/inaugurationBooklet.pdf
No Nancy, you should be concerned about your own personal holiness, rather than getting in everybody else’s business. Are you honestly arrogant enough to think you know better than the people who are actually involved in the Inaugural Mass how things should be done? Why can so many traditional-extremist types not mind their own business, and instead want to dictate how every Mass should be carried out, what everybody should be wearing, etc.?
The Filioque is missing in all the Missals used by 22 of the 23 Catholic Churches.
Allan, the question is, does The Spirit of Truth proceed from The Father, or from The Father and The Son?
Nancy, didn’t Jesus tell his apostles that He and the Father were One? He said, “Whomever sees me sees the Father, and whomever sees the Father sees me.” Given that, it seems obvious that the Holy Spirit proceeds from both, which are ONE.
Jesus said, “I am the Truth…”
The Holy Trinity:
Father, Son and Holy Spirit
Co-equal, Co-eternal, Co-existent
All-holy, all-powerful, all-knowing, omni-present.
God has been revealing Himself to us, from the book of Genesis, being a relational Triune Godhead.
To state that The Spirit of Truth proceeds from The Father, and not from The Father and The Son, makes it appear as if The Son Is not Divine which can lead to such erroneous statements such as:
“...the Muslims, who adore the one living and merciful God and who call upon Him in Prayer” - Pope Francis
We, who are Catholic, adore The Communion of Perfect Love that is The Most Holy and undivided Blessed Trinity.
Religions should stress those things they have in common with one another. Not their differences
hi bill s,
what’s an atheist like you doing here instructing the faithful? :)
i am glad pope francis recognized the common bond of monotheism that exists between catholicism and islam.
Is the Filioque from Calvary? If not, why is it important?
Why is what I would think would be called an “Installation” of a pope, called an “Inaguration”? Do we not install clergymen for all church positions, and inaugurate Presidents for Office?
With due respect to atheists on this site, please: only Catholics and other Christians respond. I am sincerely confused about Filioque & the Inaguration, and am looking for actual answers. Thank you.
Terah, the Filioque was at a/the cause of the great schism between the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox a thousand years ago. The other reason was the issue of papal primacy. Regarding the Filioque, the Catholic Church states that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The Orthodox state that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father. Depending on which one is correct, the nature of God and all of creation is different. I was starting to write just how that is, but I realized it’s from my own ponderings rather than from the Magisterium, so I’ll leave that to someone who can answer better than I.
Hope that helps. I’m a Roman Catholic, by the way. The fact that the patriarch of Constantinople came to the Mass is so beautiful and unprecedented that I am in awe. The fact that the Gospel was in Greek (unprecedented or precedented) is wonderful because of the statement of hospitality within it toward the Orthodox if for no other reason. Where Christians can be united in truth, we should be. I believe the devil’s main work in the world is division, but the unity must be under the banner of truth and never a false unity.
Re the Filioque being correct or incorrect, there are some very good articles on the web that explain why BOTH sides are correct. The subtleties of Latin and Greek allowed the introduction of the Latin word “Filioque” without being unorthodox, while the same could not be done in the Greek text. Hence the disagreements - the Greeks thought we were heretical, because we would have been if we’d used the Greek word. The Latins didn’t understand why the Greeks objected, because we hadn’t changed an article of faith. Not all parties agree with this, and so even today there is tension about the Filioque. Hopefully we will see a better discussion of this from high up, and we’ll hopefully ultimately see unity in spite of a currently divisive word. We have that unity today between Latin Catholics and Eastern Catholics, the latter legitimately not using the word “Filioque” (or translations of it) in their creeds.
“Regarding the Filioque, the Catholic Church states that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son. The Orthodox state that the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father. Depending on which one is correct, the nature of God and all of creation is different.”
Like it really matters. What a foolish thing to fight about. These theologians have nothing better to do than exaggerated the significance of a disagreement that really doesn’t matter in the long run. If someone is inspired by the Holy Spirit, they are inspired by God. It makes no difference who sent him. He is God. Now mind you, I don’t believe in any of them, so it makes even less difference to me.
Howdy, Bill S. Fancy meeting you here too. What does your good Catholic wife think of you spending so many hours making fun of Catholics on a Catholic website?
It is a great sadness to many Catholics and many Orthodox that we are divided given that we believe in the same God, have the same valid sacraments, etc. That is in fact the point—that I for one am exciting and hopeful that there will come a day when we are no longer divided, but you see, both sides believe in objective Truth, and neither side can simply abandon what they believes to be true. Still, there is cause for rejoicing here.
The question of the Filioque is not foolish if you believe that there is Truth. It’s the cement that holds the concrete together—the fine points without which everything else falls apart.
Stephen, do you have a link for some of those articles? I would love to read them.
Pax Christi,
Carla
Half the problem is communication. The other half may be real. Much like with Protestants - when Catholics say “pray to”, Protestants assume “adoration of” because that is their only reference point. All their prayer is a form of adoration of God. Ours isn’t - our prayer to Mary is not worship of her. Similarly, the Filioque is largely a matter of language, in my opinion.
I can’t find all the articles I once read long ago, but I’ll try to post three useful ones here.
http://www.catholic.com/tracts/filioque goes into some detail.
http://www.ewtn.com/library/curia/pccufilq.htm - from the Pontificial Council for Promoting Christian Unity, does very well as solving the problem, in my opinion.
http://aggreen.net/filioque/filioque.html, from the Orthodox side, looks at the word “ekporeuetai” (used in the original Nicaean creed for the procession from the Father), and “proienai”, which depicts more of what the West thinks when it says the Holy Spirit “proceeds” from the Son.
Perhaps a nice way of saying it is “proceeds from the Father through the Son.”
“The question of the Filioque is not foolish if you believe that there is Truth. It’s the cement that holds the concrete together—the fine points without which everything else falls apart.”
Really, Carla? It seems more like a wedge that separated East from West than a cement. Either side could have given in and there would be unity. They could have said “we believe in the Holy Spirit, The Lord and giver of life. Together with the Father and the Son, He is worshipped and glorified.” End of story. Problem solved.
So for 1,000+ years, the New Testament Epistles have been ignored by almost everyone, to one degree or another. It’s a pity.
Christians of all stripes will fight about peripheral matters, ignoring the obvious, till Jesus returns. Thanks to all, for the explanation.
Thanks to everyone for wonderful insights and comments re: canon law,papal masses,,the Filioque. Even with 16 years of Catholic School, I can always learn something new or anew from EWTN!
Bill S., or they could have said, there can be only ONE Spirit of Perfect Love Between The Father and The Son, so The Holy Spirit must proceed from both The Father and The Son, in the ordered, complementary communion of Perfect Love that is The Blessed Trinity.
Least it appear that there is more than One Word of God, and thus The Muslims and The Jews are worshipping the same God as Christians do, even though they are not worshipping The Blessed Trinity.
My understanding is this: in terms of the origin of the Trinity, there would be only one procession - from the Father, the origin, as expressed in the Greek word “ekporeuetai”. One procession (the Holy Spirit) and one generation (the Son.) This has been acknowledged by the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity. Both the Father and the Son send the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit can therefore be said to proceed (proienai, procedit) from both.
Terah you consistently bring up what you claim to be a complete ignoring of the New Testament epistles by the Church, and yet you have never explained exactly why you think that?
What is it that you believe is in the epistles that the Catholic church ignores? Don’t forget, those letters were written by the first Bishops of our Church and it was the Catholic church that decided which of those letters would become part of the New Testament.
So please, I am very interested to know what the Church is ignoring and what it is that you think should be done about it?
Joanp62-
I would love to see Pope Francis instruct all his cardinals to instruct all their bishops, to instruct all their parish priests, to teach and preach the New Testament Epistles (letters) in a verse-by-verse, expository manner, beginning with Romans, and ending with Revelation.
I don’t mean Romans, chapter 4, verses 1-3, and 5-9, and verse 16. Then skipping to Galatians, chapter 2, verse….......... you get the picture.
I mean teaching it in context and in its fullness. Do God’s word justice by teaching it, and then preaching it. Educate and equip Catholics. We need God’s word. All of it - thanks for asking.
I have no problems with anything the Holy Faher has done liturgically. I just wish he would polish up his liturgical presence. He doesn’t really have any as has thus far been demonstrated. I won’t mention that awful miter and chasuble he wears. I really won’t.
“I just wish he would polish up his liturgical presence. He doesn’t really have any as has thus far been demonstrated.”
People who fret about things like “liturgical presence” (whatever that is) are probably the type that this pope wants to shake some sense into. By the end of his reign, he will have brought some much needed humility to Catholics, especially to those “traditional” Catholics who long for the days prior to Vatican II. I would imagine that they will have given up or died off by then.
“People who fret about things like “liturgical presence” (whatever that is) are probably the type that this pope wants to shake some sense into. By the end of his reign, he will have brought some much needed humility to Catholics, especially to those “traditional” Catholics who long for the days prior to Vatican II.”
Let’s hope not, for they are the ones who actually believe all that “Catholic” stuff the Church tells us is so important is actually so important. They seem to be the only ones who actually believe in heaven and hell and everlasting life and all that jazz. If shaking “sense” into traditionalists is one of his goals, then perhaps they should just leave the Church to the people who look at the Church is a big social club where people are supposed to meet on Sunday to show off their family pictures and talk.
And if the Pope does have this sense shaking in his head, he will be sorely disappointed at the end of eternity for the Holy Spirit will surely disagree with him. If not then it’s all a lie and it doesn’t matter anyway.
“And if the Pope does have this sense shaking in his head, he will be sorely disappointed at the end of eternity for the Holy Spirit will surely disagree with him. If not then it’s all a lie and it doesn’t matter anyway.”
Ah. Yeah. The latter. Definitely the latter. So. If this pope finally gives the Catholic Church the reality check that it needs, he will have to answer to the Holy Spirit. Really. It’s got to be the latter. For sure.
Brannen, Bill S. is an atheist, so he really is no authority on the Liturgy of the Church. Best to just ignore him.
Bill S. what makes you think you’re in a position to comment on matters of our worship? Just because your wife is Catholic? Why do you care so much? You seem to spend an awful lot of time on this site. Maybe you need to get a life.
OK Joan. Whatever you say.
So you have a problem with me liking this Pope?
You don’t think atheists have a right to express an opinion on NCR?
Bill, Your comments did not indicate any favor of our Pope to me.
Do you post on Muslim, Jewish or Hindu sites expressing your opinion? If so, you must spend all your time on various religious sites giving your opinion, where you hold no expertise. A bit nervy and arrogant. Now, if you really had some sincere questions that would be different. But you give more importance to your opinion than is due.
Does your wife know how much you hate Catholics and the Church?
“So. If this pope finally gives the Catholic Church the reality check that it needs, he will have to answer to the Holy Spirit. Really.”
I was being sarcastic. I think it would be great if this pope shook things up. I admire a man who is his own person as St Francis definitely was. Benedict was autocratic. Francis is humble.
This is where I vent. Everywhere else I am on my best behavior. To be truthful about how I feel to my wife would damage her faith and I wouldn’t want that since she is a living saint.
I know how awful that sounds but it is the only way I have to live without causing major disruptions to my family and community. Whether you like me or not, conversing with you is very liberating. I get a lot off my chest and am happy living my life as secretive as it is. I feel bad for closet gays.
Bill S., so you won’t inflict yourself on your wife so you come here as if we are interested in your opinions. Like I said, if you had some sincere questions, maybe, but your opinions are just that-your opinions, and they don’t amount to much.
Are you taking away my privileges? If not, then don’t read my posts if you don’t like them. I will start them off with jdr for Joan don’t read. That way you will know its me and not read them. It is the different opinions that make these posts worth reading.
As a Traditionalist I feared Pope Fancis l was taking us back to the dark ages of the 60’s and 70’s. I hope I was wrong. In the Tradition of the Popes he prayed before the tombs of Bl. John Paul ll, Bl. John XXlll and St. Pius X. I read in an article today why he has not used the Ancient Gregorian Chant of the Church. It turns out he is “tone deaf” so is unable to Chant. I must learn to have greater trust in Christ. The Popes are directly guided by the Holy Ghost. I was saddened that he opened up to the Muslims, Jews and Protestants but ignored those of his own household, namely us Traditionalists. Perhaps through the guidance of God the Holy Ghost, he is preparing a huge surprise for us all. May God will it!
“I was saddened that he opened up to the Muslims, Jews and Protestants but ignored those of his own household, namely us Traditionalists. Perhaps through the guidance of God the Holy Ghost, he is preparing a huge surprise for us all. May God will it!”
Do you really think that the Pope is going to give special consideration to “Traditionalists”? The Catholic Church has enough trouble dealing with change without turning the clock back to the pre-Vatican II days
Bill S, Bl. John Paul ll and Pope Benedict XVl repeatedly made it clear that there is NO new Church. This is the same Church before, during and after Vatican ll. Those who have deceived us that V2 somehow created a new Church is only the invention of satan. There is really no pre-Vatican ll Church, except in the sense that Heresy, error, misinterpretation of the Council have all been a cancer that has afflicted Christ’s Church. Traditionalists voiced their disapproval of the “Smoke of Satan entering the very house of God”. God heard us and the Popes heard us. At this time in the Church the clocks are being turned back to those dark ages of the 60’s and the 70’s. We Traditionalists are not going to let that nightmare ever happen again.
“Traditionalists voiced their disapproval of the “Smoke of Satan entering the very house of God”. God heard us and the Popes heard us. At this time in the Church the clocks are being turned back to those dark ages of the 60’s and the 70’s. We Traditionalists are not going to let that nightmare ever happen again.”
What kind of talk is that? “Smoke of Satan entering the very house of God”? What are you talking about? John XXIII? Paul VI? Vatican II? Of all the corrupt popes, you think that those two were doing the work of the Devil? Really? Is that what a Traditionalist thinks? And what are you worried about Francis picking up where they left off?
Bill S. The Ven. Pope Paul Vl coined the phrase, “I detect the smoke of satan has entered the very house of God”. His Holiness suffered a great deal because of the innovations, experimentations, misinterpretations of the Council, changes never called for by the Council ect… He said, “My crown of thorns has been the way priests are acting today”, “When we spoke of freedom at the Council. It was not the freedom to do as one wishes but freedom from sin”. Ven. Paul Vl spoke out forcefully against what liberals were doing to the Church during the dark ages of the Church or also known as the silly season of the Church, in the times of the 60’s and 70’s. He died with a broken heart because the Council itself was totally ignored and every liberal was inventing his own version of Vatican ll and forcing their errors on all Catholics. Liberals unceasingly referred to “the spirit of Vatican ll”, ad nauseam. A term with its mentality condemned by Bl. John Paul ll. When Ven. Paul Vl died, commentators said, “Pope Paul Vl will go down in history as the Pope who was never listened to”. If one goes back and reads what Ven. Paul Vl said in those days, he very often spoke of “The great upheaval in the Church”. Bl. John Paul ll and Pope Benedict XVl picked up where Ven. Paul Vl left off, calling for the reform of the reforms. Traditionalists have come out condemning all the false reforms to the great benefit of Christ’s Church. As for His Holiness Pope Francis l it has been said that what he will be saying concerning the Church will certainly be to the dissapointment of the liberals.
Bill S, I answered you but was flagged as spam. I sure wish they would have allowed it.
Traditio, it may still get posted. Next time, copy what you write in case that happens and then you can just paste it in and try again. Sometimes, if you break the post into 2 or 3 parts, if it is long, it will take.
Bill S, If it is true that Pope Francis supported civil unions for same-sex couples, and thus supports the condoning of same-sex sexual acts which do not respect the inherent Dignity of the human person and are a violation of God’s Commandment regarding lust and the sin of adultery, and it is true that Pope Francis believes that the Muslims worship the same God as we do, which is a violation against Commandments One and Two, then Pope Francis is a false Pope because he is not in communion with The Catholic Church. Communion is not a matter of degree. One is either for Christ, or against Him. The fact that there are those who speak about compassion for those with a disordered same sex sexual inclination, but discriminate against those with a same-sex sexual inclination because they do not desire that those with a same-sex sexual inclination overcome their disordered inclination, so that they are not led into temptation, but rather, sin no more, is very disturbing. Recently both Cardinal Dolan and Cardinal Wuerl spoke about compassion for those who identify themselves according to sexual attraction, but no mention was made of the need for those persons to heal their wounds, and learn to develop healthy and Holy relationships that are oriented to The Word of God, and thus The Truth of Love. How can anyone claim they have compassion for those suffering with any type of disordered inclination, and not desire that those persons receive the necessary care and guidance to overcome their disordered inclinations, so that they are not led into temptation, but rather become transformed? Clearly anyone who claims that behavior cannot be transformed, does not believe in Christ, our Savior, to begin with. Now is the Time for Pope Francis to make it clear that one cannot be Catholic while denying The Deposit of Faith. “Behold your Mother.”- Christ
Bill S, I think maybe the post was too long. I hope it is posted as this is a subject that is of grave importance to me.
Bill S, If it is true that Pope Francis supported civil unions for same-sex couples, and thus supports the condoning of same-sex sexual acts which do not respect the inherent Dignity of the human person and are a violation of God’s Commandment regarding lust and the sin of adultery, and it is true that Pope Francis believes that the Muslims worship the same God as we do, which is a violation against Commandments One and Two, then Pope Francis is a false Pope because he is not in communion with The Catholic Church. Communion is not a matter of degree. One is either for Christ, or against Him. The fact that there are those who speak about compassion for those with a disordered same sex sexual inclination, but discriminate against those with a same-sex sexual inclination because they do not desire that those with a same-sex sexual inclination overcome their disordered inclination, so that they are not led into temptation, but rather, sin no more, is very disturbing. How can anyone claim they have compassion for those suffering with any type of disordered inclination, and not desire that those persons receive the necessary care and guidance to overcome their disordered inclinations, so that they are not led into temptation, but rather become transformed? Clearly anyone who claims that behavior cannot be transformed, does not believe in Christ, our Savior, to begin with. Now is the Time for Pope Francis to make it clear that one cannot be Catholic while denying The Deposit of Faith.
“Behold your Mother.”- Christ
“Do, whatever He tells you to do.” - Our Blessed Mother
To deny the truth about the inherent essence of the human person from the moment of conception, the fact that all persons have been created in The Image and Likeness of God, equal in Dignity, while being complementary as male or female, is to deny the inherent essence of God, who created us as a reflection of Love, and makes one an apostate to our Catholic Faith.
Wow, Nancy D. I don’t know. I am pretty sure that if you were ever disabused of your religious beliefs it would bring on a severe mental breakdown. I wouldn’t want to be responsible for that so I will just concede.
Bill S., with all due respect, there is nothing you can say that can change my belief to unbelief, nor change the fact that same-sex sexual acts, which are acts, not persons, do not respect the inherent dignity of the human person, and thus can never serve the Good of those persons engaging in same-sex sexual acts. The Good News Is, wherever sin abounds, and we are all sinners, God’s Grace and Mercy abounds ever more, if we but believe and accept God’s Salvational Love.
Fine, Nancy D. Whatever works for you. If someday you find that it isn’t working you might want to consider a few adjustments to your worldview. Just a suggestion.
Rev. 13:15-17
The second beast was given power to give breath to the image of the first beast, so that the image could speak and cause all who refused to worship the image to be killed. He also forced all people, great and small, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hands or on their foreheads,so that they could not buy or sell unless they had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of its name.This calls for wisdom. Let the person who has insight calculate the number of the beast, for it is the number of a man. That number is 666.
Rev. 20:4
I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been BEHEADED because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
The great news about Pope Francis is that he has asked for his Pontificate to be Consecrated to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. These actions bring about definitive results. The Consecration is to be done by the Portuguese Bishops at Fatima on May 13. After that we can expect to see the Holy Father with the Ermine cape and the Lace Alb. Also the return to the use of the ancient Liturgical Vestments. Deo Gratias!
Is there a reason for the passage fr Revelation being posted? I don’t get the connection.
Sorry Jimmy, but when you have to make so many excuses and stretchy explanations for why Pope Francis did this or that, it just doesn’t seem right to me. If the Eucharist is the Source and Summit of the Church, why would anyone want to shorten the Mass, especially the Pope himself? He doesn’t appear to be that physically feeble. If he was so feeble, why would the cardinals have elected him after losing Benedict XVI for the same reason? Jimmy, your statements ring hollow with me.
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
The time period for commenting on this article has expired.