« More on the Global South | Main | With the Pope »

June 04, 2006

Meeting of Minds?

Bishop Brown agrees, in general, to meet with the dissatisfied parishioners of St. Mary's-by-the-Sea.

Bishop Tod Brown unexpectedly celebrated the Saturday evening vigil Mass at St. Mary's by the Sea parish in Huntington Beach, California, on Saturday, June 3, 2006.

Mary Tripoli, a member of Restore the Sacred (who was dismissed from the parish council and invited to leave the parish and the diocese for kneeling and handing out fliers after Mass) approached the bishop after the Mass and asked him for a meeting at St. Mary's so that he could come and talk with parishioners there in order to heal the rupture within the parish.

Bishop Brown seemed hesitant, but did, in fact, agree to a meeting. However, nothing definite was set, and it is generally difficult for ordinary Catholics within the diocese to get in touch with Bishop Brown, so scheduling this meeting may be difficult, but perhaps Fr. Tran can arrange it, since he speaks with Bishop Brown on a regular basis.

This, of course, is the parish that's the site of the Kneeling Wars - which are about much more than kneeling. On both sides.

To catch up, if you're interested, go to this post at Jimmy Akins' blog as well as others there for analysis and extensive discussion in the comments. Closed Cafeteria has been covering it very closely. Here's an article from LA Catholic Mission.

My sense, from very far away, is that the whole situation is a mess that has been bungled badly (which is why it's a mess). In short, the previous pastor in this parish create a little niche of traditionalism and offered the Tridentine Mass. When he retired in 2004, Bishop Brown retired the Tridentine Mass along with it. Some details are here. Mass could be offered in Latin, but it would be Novus Ordo. There is still one Tridentine Mass offered in Orange County listed here. Here is an article from the Una Voce site about the loss of the Tridentine Mass at St. Mary's.

One can only guess, and guessing is probably not what we should do here. But it seems pretty clear that whatever church leaders are leading the charge here - the bishop, the "new" pastor, or whoever - wants to "break" the Traditionalist community at this parish. Perhaps that is because the community was producing a bit of bad fruit in the form of constructing a little mini-kingdom of sorts. It happens. There is a fine line between a thriving community and a mini-kingdom with its own particular magisterium, and they develop on both sides of the spectrum. Perhaps the cleric's desire to break the community comes from a hatred of what they stand for and a determination to impose SoCal Catholicism on everyone, everywhere, for the sake of diversity.

Perhaps it's a bit of both. Judging from the communiques put out from Restore the Sacred, it strikes me as quite possible. I can't get the pdf file in question to open, but this thread from Dom's links to it, and even if you can't open it, the discussion gives you a sense of what's in it - basically calling into question many things, including female altar servers and lectors. One of the points in the LACatholic Mission article concerns the man in charge of training altar servers who encouraged his servers not to obey diocesan liturgical norms in regard to kneeling. Sorry, that's not right.

So fight here about norms and various levels of authority all you like, but what I keep saying over and over again is this:

This is what happens, fellows, and by "fellows" I mean "bishops" and other clerics, but mostly "bishops."

This mess is about something local, but it's also about something bigger, as anyone who reads through the comments about this all over the blogosphere. Why do Catholics across the country give a flip about what's going on in a small parish in Huntington Beach, CA?

Because the hypocrisy has just about worn some of us out.

Various bishops across the land could only get away with this so long, and now that we can click on a mouse and see what's going on nationwide in a matter of minutes, the gig really is up. Selectively enforced liturgical directives are at the top of the list - you must obey this directive enacted at the diocesan level, but don't mind us if we disregard this mandatory directive emanating from Rome. We are going to invite you to leave a parish if you can't deal with the way things are going liturgically, but if we won't expend an ounce of energy preaching forcefully on anything that actually matters. The situation in Orange bears its own stamp of insanity, as this long, angry open letter to Bishop Brown attests.  One might not agree with the evaluation of every point in the letter, but the gist of it gives you a clear sense of the frustration. Why "tolerate" questionable behavior and dissent from the "left" but put the hammer down on those who seek a little diversity from the "right?"

Once again, the aggrieved have made their own missteps. But if there were problems at St. Mary's of one sort or another, wiping out the Traditionalist liturgy was not a good way to solve them, and was incredibly boneheaded. But at the same time, smoothing the edges of what had evolved at the place doesn't seem to have been the goal of the clerics involved - wiping it out in that frantic "Omygoodnessit'sPREVATICANII" hysteria so many are infected with does.

But perhaps what's reported from this past evening provides a bit of hope. Let's pray that it does. And let's pray that other bishops have been noting this mess as well, and taking notes.

And as Michael notes..  I might add if the priest were praying at Mass he wouldn't even notice what his parishioners are doing...

Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink

Comments

Why can't the Tridentine Mass be offered in English?

Posted by: Dudley at Jun 4, 2006 1:43:46 AM

Dudley:

Because no approved English translation of the 1962 Missal exists. Whether one ought to be made or not is a whole 'nother kettle of fish, which I'm not touching. :)

Posted by: Nicholas at Jun 4, 2006 1:50:14 AM

I was in a Raleigh, NC Diocese when the Bishop made a similar change - no kneeling after the Agnus Dei. I checked the GIRM - he had authority to make that change.

Some folks stood, other knelt, the pastor never made a big deal of it at all. No "mortal sin" admonitions like those of Fr. Tran. Life went on.

Posted by: Cornelius at Jun 4, 2006 1:55:03 AM

Here are some other articles about what is happening in Orange County:

Vocations director under fire in California

A Ban on Kneeling? Some Catholics Won't Stand for It

Venial Issue, Mortal Response

The Open Letter to Bishop Brown, which is linked in the thread, while long, is meant to connect dots about a general trend within the Diocese of Orange, which has alarmed a number of Catholics within the diocese. It also links a lot of articles from various sources to support its claims. Additionally, it provides photographs to provide further support.

Although the issue of Bishop Brown's actions and attitudes about homosexuality are discussed throughout much of the letter, his actions and attitudes about liturgy and other matters are discussed towards the last part of the letter, so reading the first part of the letter and concluding that covers the gist of the letter's concerns would be a mistake.

Whatever a person's take on the editorial aspects of the letter, the objective facts presented should be enough to help fair minded Catholics understand that there is real cause for grave concern about the direction the Diocese of Orange has been headed since 1998.

Posted by: john chrysostom at Jun 4, 2006 5:34:47 AM

This link also provides helpful insights, including responses from Cardinal Arinze (with working links) on the subject of kneeling during the various parts of the Mass. The comments are worth reading as well:

Do Catholics Have A Right To Kneel?

This post from Fr. Jim Tucker at Dappled Things echoed some of my own sentiments (posted in the thread linked above) about the mind of the Church on the regulation of the posture at Mass:

Whether to Bend the Knee?

Posted by: john chrysostom at Jun 4, 2006 5:49:01 AM

Amy, I was with you until the end of your comments, when you said that if the priest was actually praying at Mass, he wouldn't notice what the parishioners were doing. Wrong on two counts: first, facing the people, it is impossible not to notice what they are doing, try as one might; second, it is the job of the priest, as presider, to notice what the people are doing, as he has the responsibility of leading them in prayer.

Posted by: Fr. John at Jun 4, 2006 6:43:42 AM

For good or ill, ALL Traditionalist communities have large numbers of disaffected Catholics. Virtually everyone who goes regularly dislike altar girls and lectors. And the other end of the spectrum is Feeneyites and people who think the Novus Ordo is invalid.

Many of them are nice people, though you might not expect it.

I figured that the pastoral notion is, better to draw such fringe people in than to leave them out. If you really want only the people who don't question altar girls, then you'll have an pretty sparse indult community. Almost no reason to have it.

Look, lots of Novus Ordo priests in my Arlington diocese question altar girls. And Fr. Brian Harrison questions altar girls. My wife questions altar girls. It's not a heresy to think that altar girls are a disaster, though it may be wrong.

Posted by: Jeff at Jun 4, 2006 6:52:27 AM

I can never understand what is going on in California. I went out to California for my sister's wedding when I was a seminarian and a wedding coordinator from the parish in California said to me that the East Coast is very conservative. I almost choked on my own spit. The reason why she said this was because we asked for kneelers for the bride and groom. C'mon, it is a no brainer to put kneelers out for the bride and groom. She also said that kneeling is a penitential act. I argued that it is an act of adoration and not penance. We stand during the penitential rite and kneel during the Canon, how is kneeling penance? She then told me that they don't kneel during the Eucharistic Preyer or after Communion. On Sunday, I attended the parish Mass and, lo and behold, she was correct.

If someone came up and knelt in front of me for Communion, I will gladly put the Host on his tongue. The only thing I worry about are those people who receive the Host in their hands and walk away with it.

Bishops and priests who get all caught up with the debate about whether or not the faithful should kneel after the Agnus Dei should lock themselves up and throw away the key. The problem with California is that they have too many people who call themselves "liturgist."

Have a nice day!

Posted by: Father Ethan at Jun 4, 2006 7:24:10 AM

"I figured that the pastoral notion is, better to draw such fringe people in than to leave them out."
Of course it is.
I confess, I went through a period in my priesthood when I would have acted like Bishop Brown and Father Tran. It was disasterous, I did a lot of damage to God's people, and to myself.
A priest and more so a bishop has to first of all to be sign of God's love and his mercy, certainly he has a duty to correct error and refute falsehood. That more than ever has to be done with gentleness and patience. The Church is held together by love not by obedience or the even laws. Even the the last paragraph of the Code of Canon Law reminds us that Charity is the Law of the Church.

Posted by: Fr Raymond at Jun 4, 2006 7:49:47 AM

My folks live in the Raleigh diocese, and the last time we visited, the congregation stood after the Agnus Dei. We knelt and no one gave us a hard time. (We did ask our pastor when we got home what the bishop could or could not do in this area, and the next time we go we will stand. When in Rome... Don't like this change, though, and I sure hope it doesn't happen here in the Washington Archdiocese.)

About bishops' selective obedience to norms... It seems to me that nobody but nobody is as dictatorial about obedience to himself as someone who has trouble practicing obedience to others. That seems to be true for anyone, liberal or conservative.

Posted by: Karen LH at Jun 4, 2006 8:00:34 AM

What if instead of kneeling, members of the congregation stood like everyone else, but stood slightly bowed at the waist, and with their heads deeply bowed? (As if they were trying to examine the tips of their shoes). And if they also kept their hands in one of the prayer positions. (Palms together in front of them, or hands clasped.)

(The posture I described above felt very reverent when I attended Holy Mass with a cast on my leg and was unable to kneel or put much weight on the leg at all.)

I think I will try this posture the next time I visit a no-kneeling parish in Calif. or at OBX No Ca. (also no-kneeling)

Marion ("I'd Rather Be Kneeling") Mael Muire

Posted by: Marion (Mael Muire) at Jun 4, 2006 9:08:14 AM

Standing is also required in my diocese of Lafayette-in-Indiana. But because of arthritis and other problems, prolonged standing is painful for me and I prefer to kneel.

Let's not kid ourselves. Standing is being commanded to break down reverence for the Eucharist. Our bishop has actually forbidden prayer after reception until everyone has received. Sorry, he's not going to control when I think what. In my more cynical moments I speculate that the office of bishop was established to torment rather than lead us.

Posted by: Sandra Miesel at Jun 4, 2006 10:39:58 AM

'Let's not kid ourselves. Standing is being commanded to break down reverence for the Eucharist.'

Absolutely right, which is why one OUGHT NOT OBEY this command. If a Bishop commands something immoral--and participation in something that is intended to show less reverence to the Eucharist and to water down Catholic Eucharistic theology IS immoral--one is under no obligation to obey that command. In fact, one is obliged not to obey the command.

Posted by: reluctant penitent at Jun 4, 2006 10:59:02 AM


A few things to mention here. First, as another poster has mentioned, it is not heresy, much less being disobidient to question the use of altar girls, nor is it disobidient to question or even object to the USE of EMHCs, what liturgical music is used, use of both species or even posture one uses for communion(Despite the USCCBs best efforts, Rome has stated strongly in 3 letters that a parishoner is allowed to kneel for communion and can not be considered dis-obidient). The GIRM suggests norms, and norms are not the equivlent of canon law, as norms suggest, it suggests how somthing is normally done, but doesnt require it.

What Bp. Brown has done to St Marys by the Sea is disgusting, and since Fr. Johnson stepped down as pastor 2 years ago, at least half the parishoners of this once vital parish have left, not even the liturgically infamous Cdl. Mahoney has gone as far as Bp. Brown has in terms of stamping out kneeling, I know of at least 4 parishes in the LA archdiocese that still use the altar rail for the Novus Ordo(Thomas Aquanis college is the most well known example).

Lastly, and people on all sides have to remeber this, is liturgy in of itself is not dogma or doctrine, its a discipline, and while unity is important, it should not be the only goal, and if parishoners do not have unified postures, that doesnt mean they are being sinful.

Posted by: John B at Jun 4, 2006 11:13:18 AM

This whole thing is a mess, as Amy rightly notes.

First, you easterners (by which I, a good Californian, mean everyone east of the Sierra Nevada mountains), listen up. California is really two states, North and South. The Church in the South, with all its flaws, is a very model of good health compared with the Church in the San Francisco area, which is way to "smart" for its own good. Let's not blur that distinction, OK? Do you-all think Atlanta and New York are the same place?

We always stand at the Agnus Dei here in the north. Mostly. No one can figure out the difference because no one cares enough to worry about it.

Good pastoring would be much more sensitive, but why did I expect good pastoring from the Catholic Church in America in 2006? Sorry. My bad.

Let's not kid ourselves. Standing is being commanded to break down reverence for the Eucharist.

As for the rest of it, Sandra has hit the nail squarely on the head here. This has become open war in Southern California because people down there care about it one way or the other, but that is certainly what the war is about.

Posted by: Adam at Jun 4, 2006 11:17:28 AM

Tangential question sparked by the first and second comments: If there's no approved English translation of the Tridentine Mass, what's the English translation doing in my Dad's old (c 1959) Latin/English missal? Given the copyright date it's got to be of the Tridentine Mass. ?

Watching the rest of the discussion with fascination, and starting to tie it in to something that came up in the parish class on the Bible & Mass.

Posted by: Elaine at Jun 4, 2006 11:26:39 AM

It is a mess. A "who's the boss" moment in that diocese. No one wins because the emotions generated can be very distructive spiritually.

I cannot imagine 'fights' like this going on 30 or 40 years ago when pieces of parishes were being dismantled week to week, votives and statues were relegated to the basements and the tabernacles were moved off to the side... I think a lot of Catholics have had it and will not go quietly while more "less Catholic" liturgical changes take place.

Posted by: Colleen at Jun 4, 2006 11:42:32 AM

As a conservative Lutheran feeling drawn toward Catholicism, this information shakes me up greatly. I can only suspect it also shakes others in similar situation. I've been reading a lot of Catholic theology, the Church Fathers and listening to EWTN, and hearing about the great truths of the church -- and I've come to believe that it is true. But it's a big jolt to the system to actually speak to (liberal) practicing Catholics who attack their own faith, put it down, or wish it were different: usually more progressive, more liberal, more like the Episcopal church. And the idea that the Bishops themselves openly defy the Pope and foster defiance in all kinds of views is just chilling.

Luther -- understandably -- has an awful reputation among Catholics, but I believe he would even have plenty of negatives to hurl at the way modern Bishops and liberal church-sponsored groups appear (to me) to be gnawing away at the orthodox truths of the church. [I'm not trying to argue Luther as correct about anything specific here, just making a point that he was perhaps more a traditionalist/orthodox believer in many respects than some of the bishops and liturgists holding office today. That is a worry, given that for all his good intentions, he was wrong about plenty, IMO.]

I'm not exactly sure what my point in this post is, other than I wouldn't mind hearing some words of encouragement about life inside the Catholic church, and that my children wouldn't be taught heresy against the Creeds if my family took RCIA. ...And, to say that in some ways, the hierarchy of the Church is acting as a deterrent to conservative Protestants who might otherwise more speedily throw off their inhibitions and head toward the Tiber. And, an aggressive outreach by conservative Catholics to Biblically literate, conservative Lutherans and Anglicans -- who are facing liberal onslaughts in their own denominations -- might actually help shore up traditional worship and Creed-faithful belief in Catholic parishes.

(Please don't misunderstand this post. It's not meant to be a Protestant-vs-Catholic entry. I consider myself a guest at this site and mean no disrespect to it, Amy or the honored post-ers here.)

Mark

Posted by: Mark at Jun 4, 2006 12:08:58 PM

'Let's not kid ourselves. Standing is being commanded to break down reverence for the Eucharist.'

Bingo! Sandra is right on target as usual!

Posted by: Donald R. McClarey at Jun 4, 2006 12:09:41 PM

Dear Mark,

Thank you so much for your comments. I am sorry to hear these matters shake you greatly. (Join the club! Many of us Catholics are shaken, as well.)

But, in the words of our own Holy Father John Paul the Great, "Be not afraid!"

Mark, the disciples in Jesus' boat were also shaken pretty badly during the storm in which the Master was asleep. "Master! Master!" they cried, "Don't you care that we all going to be drowned?" But they were in no danger of drowning. The only danger was their own panic; If they lost their heads, they might go overboard, or otherwise injure themselves or one another, then, yes they might well drown.

It was a question of staying calm, and keeping their eyes on the Lord, staying near Him, and trusting in Him, ever ready to do as He directs us.

It is the same with us today.

Catholics refer to our Church as the Barque of Peter. A barque is a small boat, like the ones in which those fishermen were riding out their storm. We are riding out storms of our own, as well.

Mark, you do well to watch EWTN and read the books they recommend. They are a solid Catholic group. Also, if you have an opportunity to check out Opus Dei, I cannot sing their praises enough. I am not a member, but I am very devoted to their founder Saint Josemaria. I think his prayers, and those of our late Holy Father are helping to keep our barque intact and seaworthy.

If you ask the Holy Spirit to guide you in sticking to very solid Catholic material and solid Catholics, and to help you steer clear of the iffy stuff, you'll come out all right.

Unfortunately, much of what is out there is pretty "iffy".

Good luck, and may God bless you.

Posted by: Marion "I'd Rather Be Kneeling" Mael Muire at Jun 4, 2006 12:45:54 PM

Mark,

Marion is right about what out's there. That's the bad news. The good news is that there's probably enough people out here who can guide you to where things Catholic are not "iffy" if you ever decide to cross the Tiber.

Amy has helped facilitate that before with a bleg with a general geographical area where the convert is seeking RCIA. She's probably willing to do that again if asked.

Will keep you in prayer.

Posted by: Chris at Jun 4, 2006 1:27:29 PM

Mark,

I was a Lutheran who became Catholic 5 years ago, and I have 3 small children, so I think I can relate to your situation. I wouldn't hesitate to make the switch again. The practice of Catholicism varies widely even within dioceses. But although I don't know where you live, I strongly suspect that you could find a parish within a reasonable distance that would nurture an orthodox faith. Don't get me wrong -- there are a lot of parishes that aren't particularly vibrant and that don't offer a particularly challenging form of Catholicism, but I think what you fear -- your children being taught heresy against the Creeds -- is easily avoidable, and you can make up for any deficiencies with personal devotion and catechesis, as well as possible membership in lay movements. It is also my direct experience that newer priests are quite orthodox and vibrant, and I suspect that trend will continue.

In short, please come join us. I think you'll be glad you did, and if you do, your presence will make a difference in purifying the Church.

Posted by: T at Jun 4, 2006 1:44:43 PM

Mark,

Just stick with the Pope and you'll be fine.

The whole reason we have a beef with any Catholics is when they deviate from what the Pope teaches.

As for the rest of the discussion, I am happier with more comments I have seen here (on this topic) than in a long time.

Please continue. It will help Mark see how much people here love the Catholic faith and want to defend it.

Posted by: john chrysostom at Jun 4, 2006 1:52:05 PM

Dear Mark,

I'm so glad you are thinking of becoming Catholic. In spite of the problems, the grace you would receive is well worth it. My advice is, don't be afraid to shop around for Catholic parishes and priests. The quality (especially in terms of orthodoxy and obedience to the Pope) can vary greatly from parish to parish. Also, if you can find a priest who is willing to instruct you personally and baptize you privately, that is a legitimate way of avoiding RCIA. A good test is, if the pastor or others won't give direct answers to your questions about orthodoxy, the Pope, obedience, etc., RUN, don't walk! On the other hand, if you cannot avoid a heretical RCIA/parish priest, you could become Catholic anyway, consider the "formation" a good educational experience/"teachable moment" for the kids, and offer it up to God, especially for those Catholics who are being instructed by heretics and don't even know it.

Posted by: c at Jun 4, 2006 2:37:59 PM

The problem is that the standing requirement is not overtly heretical. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with standing at a given point at Mass--standing can be a reverent posture, and is in the Eastern Liturgy. Its origins, however, are heretical. Advocates of standing think that it will kill the last vestiges of the 'vertical' dimension of the Mass. 'See. Nothing mysterious going on here. Important people like the Bishop wouldn't be asking you to stand if there was something awesome and mysterious going on.' This attempt to eliminate evidence the real presence of God in the Eucharist is pervasive. It is reflected in the manner in which the Eucharist is received, hand-holding, the lack of incense and consecration bells, Church architecture, statuary and art and--most painfully--in the music. All of these are motivated by the heretical belief that the Mass is just a get-together and the real presence of Christ is just the community being joyful and really really liking each other. I'm not saying that the Novus Ordo Mass is a heresy. It need not be. But, de facto, it has become an expression of a heresy in most parishes--even ones that are otherwise orthodox. What Mother Angelica said about Cdl Mahony's document about the Mass applies to liturgical practices in a majority of U.S. parishes. Cdl Mahony was just being honest in putting on paper what most liturgists, bishops and priests do. "Nothing special to see up there folks! Just clap your hands, smile, and open another can of manufactured joy."

Posted by: reluctant penitent at Jun 4, 2006 2:40:35 PM

Post a comment