I'm doing something I've never done before, which is start up the old computer while watching morning Mass on TV, so that I can criticize the sermon that I just heard.
For those not Catholic, here's the structure. There are usually two Bible readings during Mass, plus excerpts from one of the Psalms. The sermon (or homily) follows a reading from the Gospel. Those of you not Catholic can probably grasp quicker than it seems some priests do that the sermon follows the Gospel so that the priest can EXPLAIN THE GOSPEL.
I just listened to a sermon by a priest who I thought knows better, but obviously does not, that was one of the worst I have listened to. It referenced the Gospel not at ALL, except for a lame sentence added at the end. Instead, it sounded like a New Age sermon touting healing miracles.
How did this mistake happen? Here's the problem. Catholics correctly uplift and celebrate saints on their special days. It is correct because people need to hear practical real life inspiration by those who have been demonstrated to be in sanctified service to the Lord God. So I didn't mind mention of the virtues and life story of "today's saint." However, it went on too long, and then to my horror, as I expected the priest to FINALLY get around to um, you know, MENTION THE GOSPEL, he went into a detailed awe struck ridiculous detailing of the medical "miracle" of modern people who have been "cured" by their belief in the saint.
As a result we heard allllllllll about the doctors, the patient, the big old cancer boo-boo, about some nun who sucked on cigars to help a leper patient, blah, blah, blah. I'm glad I don't have breakfast before Mass because I'd have hurled.
I consider it a SIN to be a priest and to give a sermon that does not even mention, say nothing of actually explaining, the GOSPEL. The sermon in a Catholic Church is not a pep talk on whatever subject the priest thinks would be hip (or someone tells him to do, as I know happens). It is also, as the Gospel, a SACRED part of the Mass, as in the sermon the priest is actually imitating both Christ and his disciples, by EXPLAINING GOD.
Worse, if it can get any worse, the lack of connection between the Gospel reading and the blah blah blah about the people who have miraculous cures, help out the down and out, etc creates a false idea about the Gospel message in people's minds. They assume they are linked and they are not!
The Gospel today, about Lydia, who heard Paul, believed, was baptized and saved, was not about Lydia thinking "Hm, here are holy people. I better believe in them in case I need a miraculous cure someday." It is the OPPOSITE because many early believers had nothing but martyrdom for their faith to look forward to. Lydia believed because she knew the Truth, through the Holy Spirit, when she heard it. She didn't "invest" in "this God" in case Paul and the others would cough up a miracle, or "in case" she needed a miraculous cure. Yet, incredibly, this priest let that impression linger, and even basically said so at the end (the old saw that you never know who might come along with miraculous power, blah, blah, blah).
Look, you don't breathe air because you think someday a tank of oxygen might cure you in illness, do you? Each day you take a breath and think to yourself, "Well, I better keep breathing just in case one day I am sick and only a tank of oxygen falling out of the sky will save me." No, duh, you breathe each day because 1) you need to and 2) it is the correct thing to do all on its own (ie. the truth). Likewise you don't believe in God in case some miracle is needed someday, or because someone may OR MAY NOT have had a miraculous cure! You believe in God because like the air, God is the ever present reality.
Heaven help us. Do we not have enough problems?
Priests, you better make sure that your sermons address the Gospel. If not, why are you there?
Prayers for the priests who are somehow keeping their sanctified purpose in the midst of those who seem determined to lead them astray. Do not follow "self agenda" sermon giving priests as your example. You are there because of the Gospel and you are indeed even alive because of the Gospel. You better be helping the people understand THAT Gospel in each and every sermon that you give, period.
Showing posts with label Catholic Mass. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Catholic Mass. Show all posts
Monday, May 10, 2010
Friday, April 10, 2009
Very pleased at Good Friday service
I attended service at the cathedral in the city nearby where I now reside and was very pleased with their celebration of Good Friday of the Lord's Passion. It was very well attended and beautifully done.
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Catholic daily prayer schedule "Divine Office"
Many Christians, including Catholics themselves, grew up in modern times where they do not realize that the Church has a very rich prayer life and schedule.
The principle way that Catholics pray is to attend the Holy Mass. The Divine Office, which is the name of the daily prayer schedule, is the second most important means of prayer. Observance of the Divine Office is binding upon the religious orders of the Church, many of whom attempt to pray at least part of the Divine Office each day. Here is the schedule and the traditional names.
Matins prayers of the night
Lauds the morning praises
Prime morning prayer
Terce prayer of the third hour
Sext prayer of the sixth hour
None prayer of the ninth hour
Vespers the evening Office
Compline end of the Office, evening prayer
For example, we frequently see the Pope conduct Vespers during his travels, and special presentations of that one of the eight parts of the Daily Office may be broadcast on TV coverage such as on the Eternal World Television Network (EWTN).
Speaking of EWTN, when I have been in Birmingham, Alabama I have attended the morning prayer (before Mass) and Vespers.
I mention this today to encourage Catholics to understand that laity were much more prayerful than they are today, to explain to other Christians that Catholic doctrine is far more prayerful than most of you realize, and to give a friendly wave to my Muslim readers, so they know another thing our faiths have in common (and that is one reason why I enjoyed hearing the call to prayer when I spent some time in Turkey back in 1995).
I hope you have found this interesting and also a gentle nudge toward a more prayerful mindset during the day ;-)
The principle way that Catholics pray is to attend the Holy Mass. The Divine Office, which is the name of the daily prayer schedule, is the second most important means of prayer. Observance of the Divine Office is binding upon the religious orders of the Church, many of whom attempt to pray at least part of the Divine Office each day. Here is the schedule and the traditional names.
Matins prayers of the night
Lauds the morning praises
Prime morning prayer
Terce prayer of the third hour
Sext prayer of the sixth hour
None prayer of the ninth hour
Vespers the evening Office
Compline end of the Office, evening prayer
For example, we frequently see the Pope conduct Vespers during his travels, and special presentations of that one of the eight parts of the Daily Office may be broadcast on TV coverage such as on the Eternal World Television Network (EWTN).
Speaking of EWTN, when I have been in Birmingham, Alabama I have attended the morning prayer (before Mass) and Vespers.
I mention this today to encourage Catholics to understand that laity were much more prayerful than they are today, to explain to other Christians that Catholic doctrine is far more prayerful than most of you realize, and to give a friendly wave to my Muslim readers, so they know another thing our faiths have in common (and that is one reason why I enjoyed hearing the call to prayer when I spent some time in Turkey back in 1995).
I hope you have found this interesting and also a gentle nudge toward a more prayerful mindset during the day ;-)
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Clapping/applause during Catholic Mass???
No no no no no.
*I am not applauding that at all, no I am not*
Clapping is not appropriate. Here is why. Even if one acclaims a particularly fine rendition of a hymn, the object of praise must always be God. So to "applaud" the singer, for example, one would traditionally shout "Amen," "Praise God," or "Hallelujah!" One is then complimenting the giver of the homily, hymn or musical for their fine contribution in praising God. That translates as praise to the performer for having done such a fine job of serving to praise God. And another thought. While in a concert hall it is talent you are applauding, but in a church the singing is display of a gift from God, and therefore praising God (for giving the speaker the words and the singer the talent) is most appropriate. So those of you who have desire to praise a particularly fine homily and cannot restrain yourselves, I suggest one of the three exclamations above. Further, if you attend a Mass where the pastor is actually soliciting applause (argh) I suggest you help him with his humility with responding with one of the above instead of applause. Here in the South I know some very prayerful and vigorous Baptist or non-denominational services where Catholics could go for quick instruction how to loosen up on their ability to shout "Hallelujah" instead of clapping, ha. That would not be such a bad thing as they recall it's the praise of God, not the praise of the talent of God's worship leader.
*I am not applauding that at all, no I am not*
Clapping is not appropriate. Here is why. Even if one acclaims a particularly fine rendition of a hymn, the object of praise must always be God. So to "applaud" the singer, for example, one would traditionally shout "Amen," "Praise God," or "Hallelujah!" One is then complimenting the giver of the homily, hymn or musical for their fine contribution in praising God. That translates as praise to the performer for having done such a fine job of serving to praise God. And another thought. While in a concert hall it is talent you are applauding, but in a church the singing is display of a gift from God, and therefore praising God (for giving the speaker the words and the singer the talent) is most appropriate. So those of you who have desire to praise a particularly fine homily and cannot restrain yourselves, I suggest one of the three exclamations above. Further, if you attend a Mass where the pastor is actually soliciting applause (argh) I suggest you help him with his humility with responding with one of the above instead of applause. Here in the South I know some very prayerful and vigorous Baptist or non-denominational services where Catholics could go for quick instruction how to loosen up on their ability to shout "Hallelujah" instead of clapping, ha. That would not be such a bad thing as they recall it's the praise of God, not the praise of the talent of God's worship leader.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Personal reflection about my love for the Mass
I love the Mass, every day and every part of it. But I thought I would share one of my “favorite” moments in the Mass and explain why.
The hymn, “Gloria,” is said or sung on Sundays outside Advent or Lent, on solemnities and feasts, and in solemn local celebrations.
I love deeply, and feel a great thrill, when the priest sings the first line, “Gloria in excelsis Deo.” This translates to “Glory to God in the highest.”
The reason I love this so much is that it is exactly the confluence of the verbal relationship between God and humans because this is “the call to prayer.” Yes, throughout the Mass the priest leads the congregation in prayer, saying “Let us pray” and then reciting or singing the prayer.
But the structure and content of this one line sung by the priest as a call to prayer, echoes through the thousands of years of a priest, and indeed even an Islamic imam, calling the faithful to prayer. When I was in Turkey back in 1995, I felt the exact same continuity of God’s verbal relationship with humans when I would hear the call to prayer from the mosque minaret.
How much more so do I feel it, then, when I am in the Catholic Mass and the priest reaches the opening line of “Gloria” in the liturgy! It is that ancient call to prayer, but not by saying “It is now time to pray” but by diving right into declaring the highest praise of God almighty.
I certainly do not want to make any priests who might read this blog to now feel self conscious! *wink* What I do feel when I hear this sung is the earnestness and sense of “calling to the people to join him in praising the Lord” by the priest, rather than if he hits the notes just right! It is that ancient call to prayer moment in the Mass.
That feeling would be lost if people got all self righteous about it and say that it’s “not fair” that the priest “gets to read the first line” and why doesn’t everyone just sing that first line together in some artsy democracy? Ha. It’s not about democracy and everyone singing along. And it’s not about rank or authority either. It is one of the many ways that faith becomes “contagious.”
There is the spiritual connection in every human to God that responds to a priest calling the assembly to prayer by first declaring his praise to God. Later in the Mass one hears the “Sanctus,” which is a direct imitation of the angels that St. John saw and heard in heaven praising God. There is a reason for a “call and answer” structure in worship. Just as in the liturgy humans imitate the angels in their worship of God in the singing of the “Sanctus,” there is always a benefit to the priest, who has committed his life to God, to “call out in prayer” and “set the example” by singing this first line of “Gloria.” When I hear a priest sing that line, I see the centuries of priests who were before him, each of whom called on the congregation to worship and give glory to God in the highest.
So that is what I’m feeling and thinking when I hear the opening line of “Gloria,” and why it is always one of my favorite moments in the Mass.
“Gloria in excelsis Deo, et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis.”
The hymn, “Gloria,” is said or sung on Sundays outside Advent or Lent, on solemnities and feasts, and in solemn local celebrations.
I love deeply, and feel a great thrill, when the priest sings the first line, “Gloria in excelsis Deo.” This translates to “Glory to God in the highest.”
The reason I love this so much is that it is exactly the confluence of the verbal relationship between God and humans because this is “the call to prayer.” Yes, throughout the Mass the priest leads the congregation in prayer, saying “Let us pray” and then reciting or singing the prayer.
But the structure and content of this one line sung by the priest as a call to prayer, echoes through the thousands of years of a priest, and indeed even an Islamic imam, calling the faithful to prayer. When I was in Turkey back in 1995, I felt the exact same continuity of God’s verbal relationship with humans when I would hear the call to prayer from the mosque minaret.
How much more so do I feel it, then, when I am in the Catholic Mass and the priest reaches the opening line of “Gloria” in the liturgy! It is that ancient call to prayer, but not by saying “It is now time to pray” but by diving right into declaring the highest praise of God almighty.
I certainly do not want to make any priests who might read this blog to now feel self conscious! *wink* What I do feel when I hear this sung is the earnestness and sense of “calling to the people to join him in praising the Lord” by the priest, rather than if he hits the notes just right! It is that ancient call to prayer moment in the Mass.
That feeling would be lost if people got all self righteous about it and say that it’s “not fair” that the priest “gets to read the first line” and why doesn’t everyone just sing that first line together in some artsy democracy? Ha. It’s not about democracy and everyone singing along. And it’s not about rank or authority either. It is one of the many ways that faith becomes “contagious.”
There is the spiritual connection in every human to God that responds to a priest calling the assembly to prayer by first declaring his praise to God. Later in the Mass one hears the “Sanctus,” which is a direct imitation of the angels that St. John saw and heard in heaven praising God. There is a reason for a “call and answer” structure in worship. Just as in the liturgy humans imitate the angels in their worship of God in the singing of the “Sanctus,” there is always a benefit to the priest, who has committed his life to God, to “call out in prayer” and “set the example” by singing this first line of “Gloria.” When I hear a priest sing that line, I see the centuries of priests who were before him, each of whom called on the congregation to worship and give glory to God in the highest.
So that is what I’m feeling and thinking when I hear the opening line of “Gloria,” and why it is always one of my favorite moments in the Mass.
“Gloria in excelsis Deo, et in terra pax hominibus bonae voluntatis.”
Friday, July 4, 2008
"Do Catholics read the Bible?" you think?
I did not want to interrupt the flow of thought in the previous blog about the Bible reading and commentary about a modern event, so I am going to use that Bible reading to make a separate point here. I am sooooooo tired of certain non-Catholic Christians who accuse the Catholics of “not reading the Bible.” While everyone can, and should, do better in their day to day Bible reading, you must understand that one reason many church going Catholics do not read the Bible more in their personal time is that there are three Bible readings a day in each Catholic Mass. I think it might be helpful to use the previous blog Bible reading as an example.
This Sunday’s Mass has the following as their three Bible readings, as listed in the commentary on Zenit that I linked to in the previous post:
The readings for this Sunday are Zechariah 9:9-10; Romans 8:9, 11-13; Matthew 11:25-30.
Now, in the previous post I copied from my “Daily Roman Missal,” which is the book used by Mass attending Catholics to follow the liturgy, the entry for Zechariah 9:9-10. So this is what the reader is reading and the parishioners are hearing:
From the Catholic Missal: First Reading
See, your king comes to you humbly.
A reading from the Book of the Prophet Zechariah
Thus says the Lord: Rejoice heartily, O daughter Zion, shout for joy, O daughter Jerusalem. See, your king shall come to you; a just savior is he, meek and riding on an ass, on a colt, the foal of an ass. He shall banish the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem; the warrior’s bow shall be banished, and he shall proclaim peace to the nations. His dominion shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth.
Ok, so that is the first reading in the allegedly non Bible reading Catholic Mass. Now I’m going to flip to that passage in my New American Bible, right here on the desk by my left elbow.
Zechariah 9:9-10
Rejoice heartily, O daughter Zion,
Shout for joy, O daughter Jerusalem!
See, your king shall come to you;
A just savior is he,
Meek, and riding on an ass,
On a colt, the foal of an ass.
He shall banish the chariot from Ephraim,
And the horse from Jerusalem;
The warrior’s bow shall be banished,
And he shall proclaim peace to the nations.
His dominion shall be from sea to sea,
And from the River to the ends of the earth.
Hmm, well, that sure looks like word for word a Bible reading to me. But wait, I own Protestant Bibles too, even though they leave out a number of “our” chapters. Let me make doubly sure that then thar Katolics are really reading the Bible. *Will now walk to the dining room cabinet where I have my Protestant Bibles.*
OK, I’m back. Here is my New King James version, which I bought because it is a small portable size and has a lovely fuchsia colored cover.
Zechariah 9: 9-10
Rejoice greatly, O daughter of
Zion!
Shout, O daughter of
Jerusalem!
Behold, your King is coming to you:
He is just and having salvation,
Lowly and riding on a donkey,
A colt, the foal of a donkey.
I will cut off the chariot from
Ephraim
And the horse from Jerusalem;
The battle bow shall be cut off.
He shall speak peace of the
nations:
His dominion shall be from sea
to sea.
And from the River to the ends
of the earth.
Um, so what do you think? It looks like us Catholics are reading the Bible to me.
This Sunday’s Mass has the following as their three Bible readings, as listed in the commentary on Zenit that I linked to in the previous post:
The readings for this Sunday are Zechariah 9:9-10; Romans 8:9, 11-13; Matthew 11:25-30.
Now, in the previous post I copied from my “Daily Roman Missal,” which is the book used by Mass attending Catholics to follow the liturgy, the entry for Zechariah 9:9-10. So this is what the reader is reading and the parishioners are hearing:
From the Catholic Missal: First Reading
See, your king comes to you humbly.
A reading from the Book of the Prophet Zechariah
Thus says the Lord: Rejoice heartily, O daughter Zion, shout for joy, O daughter Jerusalem. See, your king shall come to you; a just savior is he, meek and riding on an ass, on a colt, the foal of an ass. He shall banish the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem; the warrior’s bow shall be banished, and he shall proclaim peace to the nations. His dominion shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth.
Ok, so that is the first reading in the allegedly non Bible reading Catholic Mass. Now I’m going to flip to that passage in my New American Bible, right here on the desk by my left elbow.
Zechariah 9:9-10
Rejoice heartily, O daughter Zion,
Shout for joy, O daughter Jerusalem!
See, your king shall come to you;
A just savior is he,
Meek, and riding on an ass,
On a colt, the foal of an ass.
He shall banish the chariot from Ephraim,
And the horse from Jerusalem;
The warrior’s bow shall be banished,
And he shall proclaim peace to the nations.
His dominion shall be from sea to sea,
And from the River to the ends of the earth.
Hmm, well, that sure looks like word for word a Bible reading to me. But wait, I own Protestant Bibles too, even though they leave out a number of “our” chapters. Let me make doubly sure that then thar Katolics are really reading the Bible. *Will now walk to the dining room cabinet where I have my Protestant Bibles.*
OK, I’m back. Here is my New King James version, which I bought because it is a small portable size and has a lovely fuchsia colored cover.
Zechariah 9: 9-10
Rejoice greatly, O daughter of
Zion!
Shout, O daughter of
Jerusalem!
Behold, your King is coming to you:
He is just and having salvation,
Lowly and riding on a donkey,
A colt, the foal of a donkey.
I will cut off the chariot from
Ephraim
And the horse from Jerusalem;
The battle bow shall be cut off.
He shall speak peace of the
nations:
His dominion shall be from sea
to sea.
And from the River to the ends
of the earth.
Um, so what do you think? It looks like us Catholics are reading the Bible to me.
Thursday, July 3, 2008
Personal story/thoughts re attacks on Catholic church
Just a closing personal recollection to share with you, as I feel I’ve done more than enough blogging for today. I’d do much less but have such a sense of dread and foreboding at the dire condition of religious discourse and the misuse of the word “tolerance” in the world today. For example, Catholics are called intolerant, yet the same accusers would defend any half ass “spiritual system” that drops into a person’s dopey head. Catholics are called “intolerant” for not “allowing” women to be priests, but by the same token by that accusation the critics are basically saying that a faith cannot exist where there is a class of mediators called consecrated priests who must be male. Again, if some half ass New Age spiritual system came along where the only sermon givers could must be gay men, the critics would laud that system and not call it intolerant at all.
Whatever else the critics falsely say about the Catholic Church, they have to admit one thing. The Catholic Church doesn’t sit around writing blogs and documents and books criticizing other faiths. Shouldn’t people think long and hard what THAT means? We don’t make money with pop or “scholarly” books attacking our post Reformation brethren, Muslims, or even New Agers. We keep it focused on the Lord Jesus Christ and God.
So here is the story I want to share with you. The grandfather of one of my sponsored Native American children gave me and my husband a great privilege in the 1980’s. We were able to visit one of his tribe’s kivas, which is their underground place of worship. It was an extremely moving experience, and to this day it remains one of my fondest memories. Now, this tribe believes that their prayer life is an essential component of the survival of the world. In other words, they worry that if they ever die out, that the world will too, because they will be unable to do their native worship of God.
I have enormous respect for this, I relate to it, and I applaud their belief. You don’t find me arguing with them that they need to convert to Christianity. Far from that, I hear the Holy Spirit in his words. It is the sense of responsibility to God, not superstition that motivates this pious man and others like him. His focus is on God, and on their role in continuing to make the world a spiritually worthy place for physical life to continue. I’m not saying to run out and get insurance policies for them, ha, or now proclaim that you have learned a spiritual secret, because there’s no secret to it, as this belief is confessed in classic text books about this tribe. What I am showing you is that “spiritual envy” should not exist in anyone who truly loves God. We came together as colleagues, this medicine man and I. I don’t want to make him a Catholic, and he didn’t want to initiate me into the tribe, but he did pay me a high honor.
It is that attitude that is also behind the Catholic Mass. By that I mean that everyone benefits spiritually from each Catholic Mass celebrated, even if you don’t even know what a Catholic is. The Catholic Mass is the sacramental worship of God. We don’t run out of Mass saying that no one else’s worship is valid. The Catholic Mass is for the benefit of not only all Christians, Catholic or not, but of all people, even those who are infidel, who totally do not believe in God. I’m thrilled when I see packed parking lots at the Baptist church down the street. If people feel moved to have a “home” praise and worship service, more power to them: they are praising and worshipping God. But the Catholic Church, along with the other sacramental churches, such as Orthodox, Anglican and so on, are doing what no one else is doing. They are participating in consecrated sacramental worship of God in the spirit that instructions for consecrated worship was given to the first man, Adam, and throughout the faith history of the Israelites. Why in the world would anyone criticize the Catholic Church for continuing to have consecrated sacramental worship of God that is in the direct footsteps of the original faith as given to Abraham, Moses and their spiritual descendents? Why is there such one sided hostility toward the Catholic Church regarding the structure of their liturgy and the formation of their faith? It is spiritual jealousy and arrogance. I sleep a little better at night knowing these past two decades that I met that medicine man who feels he carries a divine contribution toward the spirituality and indeed survivability of humans, even on behalf of the 99.9 percent of the world who never even heard of their tribe or their beliefs. What kind of person resents the Catholic Church for continuing to celebrate consecrated sacramental worship of God on behalf of everyone for two thousand years, continuing the faith history that existed for even two thousand years before them?
By the fruit you will know the tree. If the fruit is to make a name for oneself, to make money for oneself, or to attempt to erode the faith of a group of people by being hostile to the Catholic Church as a sacred institution, you really have to question how rotten might be that tree, despite their using the sweet name of Jesus.
Whatever else the critics falsely say about the Catholic Church, they have to admit one thing. The Catholic Church doesn’t sit around writing blogs and documents and books criticizing other faiths. Shouldn’t people think long and hard what THAT means? We don’t make money with pop or “scholarly” books attacking our post Reformation brethren, Muslims, or even New Agers. We keep it focused on the Lord Jesus Christ and God.
So here is the story I want to share with you. The grandfather of one of my sponsored Native American children gave me and my husband a great privilege in the 1980’s. We were able to visit one of his tribe’s kivas, which is their underground place of worship. It was an extremely moving experience, and to this day it remains one of my fondest memories. Now, this tribe believes that their prayer life is an essential component of the survival of the world. In other words, they worry that if they ever die out, that the world will too, because they will be unable to do their native worship of God.
I have enormous respect for this, I relate to it, and I applaud their belief. You don’t find me arguing with them that they need to convert to Christianity. Far from that, I hear the Holy Spirit in his words. It is the sense of responsibility to God, not superstition that motivates this pious man and others like him. His focus is on God, and on their role in continuing to make the world a spiritually worthy place for physical life to continue. I’m not saying to run out and get insurance policies for them, ha, or now proclaim that you have learned a spiritual secret, because there’s no secret to it, as this belief is confessed in classic text books about this tribe. What I am showing you is that “spiritual envy” should not exist in anyone who truly loves God. We came together as colleagues, this medicine man and I. I don’t want to make him a Catholic, and he didn’t want to initiate me into the tribe, but he did pay me a high honor.
It is that attitude that is also behind the Catholic Mass. By that I mean that everyone benefits spiritually from each Catholic Mass celebrated, even if you don’t even know what a Catholic is. The Catholic Mass is the sacramental worship of God. We don’t run out of Mass saying that no one else’s worship is valid. The Catholic Mass is for the benefit of not only all Christians, Catholic or not, but of all people, even those who are infidel, who totally do not believe in God. I’m thrilled when I see packed parking lots at the Baptist church down the street. If people feel moved to have a “home” praise and worship service, more power to them: they are praising and worshipping God. But the Catholic Church, along with the other sacramental churches, such as Orthodox, Anglican and so on, are doing what no one else is doing. They are participating in consecrated sacramental worship of God in the spirit that instructions for consecrated worship was given to the first man, Adam, and throughout the faith history of the Israelites. Why in the world would anyone criticize the Catholic Church for continuing to have consecrated sacramental worship of God that is in the direct footsteps of the original faith as given to Abraham, Moses and their spiritual descendents? Why is there such one sided hostility toward the Catholic Church regarding the structure of their liturgy and the formation of their faith? It is spiritual jealousy and arrogance. I sleep a little better at night knowing these past two decades that I met that medicine man who feels he carries a divine contribution toward the spirituality and indeed survivability of humans, even on behalf of the 99.9 percent of the world who never even heard of their tribe or their beliefs. What kind of person resents the Catholic Church for continuing to celebrate consecrated sacramental worship of God on behalf of everyone for two thousand years, continuing the faith history that existed for even two thousand years before them?
By the fruit you will know the tree. If the fruit is to make a name for oneself, to make money for oneself, or to attempt to erode the faith of a group of people by being hostile to the Catholic Church as a sacred institution, you really have to question how rotten might be that tree, despite their using the sweet name of Jesus.
Tired accusations churches pagan/bureaucratic
I have to write a quick posting, one that’s going to use just some fast examples rather than either a scholarly or a contemporary language discussion with analogies. I’m spending some time reading a blog where a Christian scholar is picking apart another in the series of “anti-institutional church” books that pop up in order to confuse and divide the body faithful even more (if that’s possible, and obviously I guess that it is). The authors of the book claim to have done all sorts of church history, but apparently all that they cite is either misinterpretation or cherry picked to attack churches for being bureaucracies and institutions as being “un Biblical.” It’s like the needle stuck in the record groove how many times we have to listen to that over and over and over again. The blog I was reading was doing a great job of analyzing and refuting (while exposing the bias) points taken directly from the book. You can see the agenda supporters kick in, however, in some of the comments. All I can say is that people who continue to take on those who try to pick apart the “institutional church” are doing God’s work.
Apparently the authors rarely reference the Catholic liturgy or institution except to make the usual swipes about innocent folks being persecuted by the Church. They actually seem to be mostly “against” non-Catholic institutional churches as being un-Biblical and the usual “not what Jesus said or would have wanted.” But rather than that meaning that the Catholic Church is getting a pass on this, apparently the Church is not even mentioned because it is supposedly so totally indefensible that it is off the wall “un Biblical” and “not what Jesus said or would have wanted.” Sigh. So rather than dive into this whole mess again, which I tire of the game, but because I am fuming, I want to get three points out for my readers to use to keep their bearings when they are exposed to back and forth such as these.
1. Music and singing is attacked as being “un Biblical” and “not what Jesus would have wanted.” Here is my answer from the Catholic point of view, from which the music tradition of the post reformation Christian churches spring.
The Catholic Mass should be viewed as imitating what Jesus taught and what is in the Bible, and grew in complexity for this reason over the years, not because of a desire to become more “bureaucratic” and being “more pagan.” Church founding fathers and their descendants added Biblical elements to the liturgy to make it more Biblical, not less. One of the main hymns of the Catholic Mass, the Sanctus, is not only taken directly from the Bible, but it is in the Mass in order to actually imitate the very angels in heaven word for word in their singing of God’s praises. Early Catholic liturgists examined the Old Testament text and rather than be “pagan” or “bureaucratic,” they eagerly took the very words of the angels from their lips in praise of God and made it one of the essential segments of the liturgy. St. John the Apostle, the Apostle loved by Jesus and the longest living Apostle (100 years old) wrote the Apocalypse, otherwise known as the Book of Revelation and this is what he observed.
Revelation 4:1, 6 After this I had a vision of an open door to heaven...
The four living creatures, each of them with six wings, were covered with eyes inside and out. Day and night they do not stop exclaiming:
"Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God almighty,
who was, and who is, and who is to come."
Catholic Mass: At the end of the preface he joins his hands and together with the people, concludes it by singing or saying aloud:
Holy, holy, holy, Lord, God of power and might,
heaven and earth are full of your glory.
Hosanna in the highest.
Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.
Hosanna in the highest.
What could be more reverential and Biblical than that? And if you are worried about all those "new songs" that are in the liturgy besides this one that has "the Biblical stamp of approval" read this:
Revelation 14:1-3
Then I looked and there was the Lamb standing on Mount Zion... The sound I heard was like that of harpists playing their harps. They were singing what seemed to be a new hymn before the throne...no one could learn this hymn except the hundred and forty four thousand who had been ransomed from the earth...
Clearly even at the End of Days when Christ returns, there is a "new hymn" that is a sign of the redeemed faithful. So we are supposed to think that if a new hymn demarks the end of times and is thus obviously pleasing to God, that songs of worship while the earth still exists are "pagan" or "bureaucratic?"
2. Use of incense is not bureaucratic or pagan leavings, but as with the music example, a desire to make the Mass as biblical as possible. This cannot be dismissed as saying, "Oh, well the Jews used incense but the Temple was destroyed and there is nothing in the New Testament that says incense is 'what Jesus would have wanted' or Biblical." Oh yeah?
Revelation 4:1 After this I had a vision of an open door to heaven...
Revelation 8:3 Another angel came and stood at the altar, holding a gold censer. He was given a great quantity of incense to offer, along with the prayers of all the holy ones, on the gold altar that was before the throne.
Catholic Mass: After the people have assembled, the priest and the ministers go to the altar while the entrance song is being sung.
When the priest comes to the altar, he makes the customary reverence with the ministers, kisses the altar and incenses it.
Apparently St. John observed first hand that God likes "a great quantity of incense" and it is placed in a "gold" censer no less. So much for those who say that Jesus would prefer that God be worshipped with a rattan place mat bought at a dollar store.
3. The accusation that the Church hierarchy is "un Biblical" because Jesus said all of the Apostles were equal is incorrect and totally ignores St. Peter and what Jesus said to them as if that part of the New Testament is written in invisible ink. Oops, I guess it's invisible ink that the Catholics seem to have been able to read, but not anti institutional church critics.
John 21: 15-18
Read that verse carefully. The RESURRECTED Jesus Christ singles out Peter to be questioned three times as to his love of Jesus, and therefore his exhortation to be the earthly shepherd of the flock of Jesus. Jesus didn't hold a hippie vote or ask that they manage by committee. He selected Peter. A few verses later Jesus makes a further distinguishing among the Apostles. He indicated that all would be martyred except John. Peter questioned why this was and Jesus said to him "What if I want him to remain until I come? What concern is it of yours? You follow me." Jesus is explicitly indicating a sequential order among his "rock" Peter, who must follow him, and John, who will follow Jesus only when Jesus "comes for him" (a natural death).
So it is false to portray the Apostles as all "equal." All men and women are equal, but Jesus clearly assigned roles and sequences of events through both statement and prophecy. And indeed Jesus sent an angel to take John to heaven and witness what he writes in the Book of Revelation. John "got the job" of living a very long natural life, training many Christian followers, and "writing the last chapter" in what would be, through the Holy Spirit's guidance, the Bible. Peter "got the job" of being the martyred rock, the Bishop of Rome and therefore the first Pope, upon whom Jesus built his Church. How can anyone say that a hierarchy of different roles and sequences of events is un-Biblical or done for "pomp and bureaucracy?" It's really outrageous.
Anyway, keep these three examples in mind whenever you feel attacked or uncertain about the solid Biblical foundation for an institutional Christian church structure and formal sacred required liturgy. One blindness and stumbling block that those type of people have is that they confuse Jesus being definitive regarding not being personally worshipped and pointing all worship back to God with Jesus now saying it's "what the heck" regarding sacred worship. That is incredibly far from the truth.
Apparently the authors rarely reference the Catholic liturgy or institution except to make the usual swipes about innocent folks being persecuted by the Church. They actually seem to be mostly “against” non-Catholic institutional churches as being un-Biblical and the usual “not what Jesus said or would have wanted.” But rather than that meaning that the Catholic Church is getting a pass on this, apparently the Church is not even mentioned because it is supposedly so totally indefensible that it is off the wall “un Biblical” and “not what Jesus said or would have wanted.” Sigh. So rather than dive into this whole mess again, which I tire of the game, but because I am fuming, I want to get three points out for my readers to use to keep their bearings when they are exposed to back and forth such as these.
1. Music and singing is attacked as being “un Biblical” and “not what Jesus would have wanted.” Here is my answer from the Catholic point of view, from which the music tradition of the post reformation Christian churches spring.
The Catholic Mass should be viewed as imitating what Jesus taught and what is in the Bible, and grew in complexity for this reason over the years, not because of a desire to become more “bureaucratic” and being “more pagan.” Church founding fathers and their descendants added Biblical elements to the liturgy to make it more Biblical, not less. One of the main hymns of the Catholic Mass, the Sanctus, is not only taken directly from the Bible, but it is in the Mass in order to actually imitate the very angels in heaven word for word in their singing of God’s praises. Early Catholic liturgists examined the Old Testament text and rather than be “pagan” or “bureaucratic,” they eagerly took the very words of the angels from their lips in praise of God and made it one of the essential segments of the liturgy. St. John the Apostle, the Apostle loved by Jesus and the longest living Apostle (100 years old) wrote the Apocalypse, otherwise known as the Book of Revelation and this is what he observed.
Revelation 4:1, 6 After this I had a vision of an open door to heaven...
The four living creatures, each of them with six wings, were covered with eyes inside and out. Day and night they do not stop exclaiming:
"Holy, holy, holy is the Lord God almighty,
who was, and who is, and who is to come."
Catholic Mass: At the end of the preface he joins his hands and together with the people, concludes it by singing or saying aloud:
Holy, holy, holy, Lord, God of power and might,
heaven and earth are full of your glory.
Hosanna in the highest.
Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.
Hosanna in the highest.
What could be more reverential and Biblical than that? And if you are worried about all those "new songs" that are in the liturgy besides this one that has "the Biblical stamp of approval" read this:
Revelation 14:1-3
Then I looked and there was the Lamb standing on Mount Zion... The sound I heard was like that of harpists playing their harps. They were singing what seemed to be a new hymn before the throne...no one could learn this hymn except the hundred and forty four thousand who had been ransomed from the earth...
Clearly even at the End of Days when Christ returns, there is a "new hymn" that is a sign of the redeemed faithful. So we are supposed to think that if a new hymn demarks the end of times and is thus obviously pleasing to God, that songs of worship while the earth still exists are "pagan" or "bureaucratic?"
2. Use of incense is not bureaucratic or pagan leavings, but as with the music example, a desire to make the Mass as biblical as possible. This cannot be dismissed as saying, "Oh, well the Jews used incense but the Temple was destroyed and there is nothing in the New Testament that says incense is 'what Jesus would have wanted' or Biblical." Oh yeah?
Revelation 4:1 After this I had a vision of an open door to heaven...
Revelation 8:3 Another angel came and stood at the altar, holding a gold censer. He was given a great quantity of incense to offer, along with the prayers of all the holy ones, on the gold altar that was before the throne.
Catholic Mass: After the people have assembled, the priest and the ministers go to the altar while the entrance song is being sung.
When the priest comes to the altar, he makes the customary reverence with the ministers, kisses the altar and incenses it.
Apparently St. John observed first hand that God likes "a great quantity of incense" and it is placed in a "gold" censer no less. So much for those who say that Jesus would prefer that God be worshipped with a rattan place mat bought at a dollar store.
3. The accusation that the Church hierarchy is "un Biblical" because Jesus said all of the Apostles were equal is incorrect and totally ignores St. Peter and what Jesus said to them as if that part of the New Testament is written in invisible ink. Oops, I guess it's invisible ink that the Catholics seem to have been able to read, but not anti institutional church critics.
John 21: 15-18
Read that verse carefully. The RESURRECTED Jesus Christ singles out Peter to be questioned three times as to his love of Jesus, and therefore his exhortation to be the earthly shepherd of the flock of Jesus. Jesus didn't hold a hippie vote or ask that they manage by committee. He selected Peter. A few verses later Jesus makes a further distinguishing among the Apostles. He indicated that all would be martyred except John. Peter questioned why this was and Jesus said to him "What if I want him to remain until I come? What concern is it of yours? You follow me." Jesus is explicitly indicating a sequential order among his "rock" Peter, who must follow him, and John, who will follow Jesus only when Jesus "comes for him" (a natural death).
So it is false to portray the Apostles as all "equal." All men and women are equal, but Jesus clearly assigned roles and sequences of events through both statement and prophecy. And indeed Jesus sent an angel to take John to heaven and witness what he writes in the Book of Revelation. John "got the job" of living a very long natural life, training many Christian followers, and "writing the last chapter" in what would be, through the Holy Spirit's guidance, the Bible. Peter "got the job" of being the martyred rock, the Bishop of Rome and therefore the first Pope, upon whom Jesus built his Church. How can anyone say that a hierarchy of different roles and sequences of events is un-Biblical or done for "pomp and bureaucracy?" It's really outrageous.
Anyway, keep these three examples in mind whenever you feel attacked or uncertain about the solid Biblical foundation for an institutional Christian church structure and formal sacred required liturgy. One blindness and stumbling block that those type of people have is that they confuse Jesus being definitive regarding not being personally worshipped and pointing all worship back to God with Jesus now saying it's "what the heck" regarding sacred worship. That is incredibly far from the truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
