The Sunday Asperges: Holy Water in a Time of Drought

“…My flesh faints for thee, as in a dry and weary land where no water is…”

It is not difficult to understand why it has been thought best to remove holy water from the stoups in our churches. Having lots of people dip their fingers into a common bowl at a time when germs are a bigger problem than usual is not a great idea. The same line of reasoning should also have led to a suspension of giving Communion from hand to hand, but logical consistency has never been a strength of the postconciliar Church. I cannot refrain from adding that those who maintain that if we just have “enough faith” (however this is to be measured), no amount of germs can ever get us sick, need a crash course on the concept of superstition in St. Thomas. Our baptism equipped us with marvelous supernatural powers, not Marvel superpowers.

All the same, the flip side is true: holy water has been and should be such an important sacramental in Catholic life that its removal ought to strike us as extremely regrettable, and steps should be taken to remedy its absence from churches. I’ve seen almost no indications that this is a feeling shared by most pastors and people, and I’m afraid that the explanation is obvious: holy water just ain’t what it used to be. Or to put it more simply, the only way you can get holy water is to use the old rite of blessing it, which really blesses it; the new rite doesn’t, as we learned at the last Sacred Liturgy Conference in a challenging talk given by Archbishop Cordileone, contrasting the old and new rites for the blessing of water (text; video). Fr. Zuhlsdorf presents the two rites side by side, where the difference becomes painfully, even scandalously, evident. (Here's a more recent article that does the same.)

Excerpts from the old prayer of exorcising and blessing holy water:

O water, creature of God, I exorcise you in the name of God the Father + Almighty, and in the name of Jesus + Christ His Son, our Lord, and in the power of the Holy + Spirit. I exorcise you so that you may put to flight all the power of the enemy, and be able to root out and supplant that enemy with his apostate angels, through the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, who will come to judge the living and the dead and the world by fire…. May this, your creature, become an agent of divine grace in the service of your mysteries, to drive away evil spirits and dispel sickness… May the wiles of the lurking enemy prove of no avail. Let whatever might menace the safety and peace of those who live here be put to flight by the sprinkling of this water, so that the health obtained by calling upon your holy name, may be made secure against all attack…. Humbly and fearfully do we pray to you, O Lord, and we ask you to look with favor on this salt and water which you created. Shine on it with the light of your kindness. Sanctify it by the dew of your love, so that, through the invocation of your holy name, wherever this water and salt is sprinkled, it may turn aside every attack of the unclean spirit, and dispel the terrors of the poisonous serpent.

Now that’s how the Catholic Church used to pray — and still does, where the Faith survives.

The new rite reads like this:

Blessed are you, Lord, all-powerful God, who in Christ, the living water of salvation, blessed and transformed us. Grant that, when we are sprinkled with this water or make use of it, we will be refreshed inwardly by the power of the Holy Spirit… (etc.)

But nowhere an actual blessing of the water. Consequently, most Catholic churches for the past fifty years have had the equivalent of birdbaths, which has not allowed the demon-dispelling and passion-quelling power of this potent sacramental to impress itself on us. The replacement of this water with sand during Lent or with nothing at the present moment is not likely to cause a furor.

Have a squirt!

However, there is still a deep association for many between going to church and taking holy water. We want to do something when we enter a church to show that we are preparing ourselves for our purpose there. The water does remind us of our baptism and, if it is actually blessed water, it is an occasion of grace and the remission of venial sins, as St. Thomas argues. It seems most fitting that we make the sign of the Cross with water that is reminiscent of the water flowing, with blood, from the side of Christ. If our spirits are troubled from within or vexed from without, real holy water puts demons to flight, as St Teresa of Jesus says in her Autobiography: “From long experience I have learned that there is nothing like holy water to put devils to flight and prevent them from coming back again. They also flee from the Cross, but return; so holy water must have great virtue.” The language of the old prayer cited above perfectly explains why it has such power.

There are, then, multiple causes of regret. First, that the blessing of holy water was effectively abandoned. Second, that holy water is so readily and unobjectionably removed from churches. Third, that the habit of using holy water has diminished among Catholics to such an extent that most would not think of keeping a bottle of it on hand at home to sprinkle regularly in the home and on one another. Fourth, that the glorious ceremony of the Asperges, a regular feature before Sunday High Mass in the usus antiquior, has become a rarely-used and much-altered feature of the Novus Ordo Missae (bizarrely enough supplanting its penitential rite, because, after all, one can never pray too little for mercy).

Now is a good time to reverse all this.

• Ghostly fathers, use the real rite of blessing of holy water from the Rituale Romanum. Fr. Jerabek has conveniently formatted it on a single sheet of paper. You are allowed to do so by Summorum Pontificum; indeed, you are allowed to do so because what was sacred in ages past is and remains sacred and great for us and can never be considered harmful or be prohibited. 
• Put the Book of Blessings in a safe place, where no one will ever find it again.
• Use the Asperges with the High Mass whenever you can, and give the people a good dousing, with the follow-through of a tennis arm.
• Teach about the value of holy water and make small containers of it available at the back of the church for free.
• Fathers of families, get hold of real holy water and sprinkle it before bedtime, perhaps right after the evening rosary, on your wife and children. Or before the rosary, if it looks like some are too sleepy!

The faster we got rid of our distinctively Catholic items and practices during Covidtide, the more obvious it is that we no longer believe in their efficacy (this holds as much for sacraments as for sacramentals); the sooner we take them up again, or find ways to keep using them, the more evident it is that we are profiting from the trials willed by Divine Providence.

Huh?

“...until the Eschaton, Parousia, or whatever the government decides.”

This, at least, is better: the faithful are offered alternative access

Contempt for Communion and the Mechanization of Mass

Rube Goldberg, Professor Butts and the Self-Operating Napkin (1931)

On May 6, I published at OnePeterFive an article entitled “Bishops Cannot Mandate Communion on the Hand or Forbid Communion on the Tongue.” Taking up and augmenting material first published at NLM on February 29 and March 2, my goal was to compile in one convenient place testimonies to the universal law of the Church about the right of the (properly disposed) faithful to receive Holy Communion on the tongue, which is and remains the norm.

To this article, some have responded: “That’s all well and good, but we know that the bishops will go ahead and do this anyway, whether they have the authority to do so or not.” Indeed, contrary to the policy of the Thomistic Institute recommended by the USCCB, many dioceses have already published such illegal policies that are being forced on clergy and laity in the name of “obedience.” (Our situation is bringing home ever more clearly the utter lack of clear and sound thinking about what the virtue of obedience is and what it is not. I recommended this superlative article on the subject, as well as this shorter piece.)

My reply here would be that there is a benefit to knowing that certain policies are illegal: as the Catholic Church has always taught, an unjust law does not bind in conscience. That all too many bishops have grown accustomed to a “lawless” mode of operation — one in which they simply do not care what the Vatican says, or Canon Law for that matter — is not exactly breaking news. Tradition-loving Catholics have been dealing with it for a good half-century now, especially after 1984 (Quattuor Abhinc Annos), 1988 (Ecclesia Dei Adflicta), 2007 (Summorum Pontificum and Con Grande Fiducia), and 2011 (Universae Ecclesiae).

A video has been making the rounds of a young canon lawyer attempting to argue that bishops do have the right, in emergencies, to suspend universal law. Typically such justifications will breezily invoke “the common good” in order to wipe out anything and everything that stands in the way. It is precisely this kind of behavior that has made the expression “the common good” sound fascist, as if we’re ants in an anthill, lining up to be sacrificed for the good of the colony. Fr. Zuhlsdorf refutes the canonist tidily, and then moves into larger questions.

I was not surprised to hear from a German friend that the bishops of Germany have already moved to prohibit communion on the tongue in every diocese of their country. She speculates that if it is not possible for believers to receive on the tongue at traditional Latin Masses, they will peel off in large numbers to the SSPX if things are handled differently there. She then shared with me stunning photos of different “safe methods” proposed for distributing communion that indicate massive disrespect for Our Lord and for His people, a complete loss of the sense of the sacred, no awareness of fittingness, an utter lack of common sense or supernatural faith.

The “Alice Through the Plexiglass” Method

The “Stop and Drop” Method

The “Stretch and Catch” Method

Continue Reading this Article. . .

First Mass Celebrated Coram Episcopo in Wisconsin

On Saturday, June 30, 2018, newly-ordained Fr Peter Lee celebrated his first Mass as a Solemn Mass, with His Excellency Robert Morlino, Bishop of Madison, Wisconsin, in attendance, and with Fr John Zuhlsdorf serving as the Assistant Priest, at the church of St Mary in Pine Bluff. Music included the Veni Creator of Giammateo Asola, and his Missa secunda a 3 for the Ordinary, Byrd’s Sacerdotes Sancti and Palestrina’s Ego sum panis vitae as Communion motets, Gregorian propers, the solemn Te Deum, and “Hail, Holy Queen Enthroned Above” as the recessional. These photos by Mr Joseph Hanneman are reproduced courtesy of the Traditional Latin Mass Society of Madison, on whose website you can see the complete set. Our congratulations to Fr Lee, to his family and friends, and to Bishop Morlino and the diocese of Madison - ad multos annos!

In a Missa coram Episcopo, the bishop recites the prayers at the foot of the altar together with the celebrant, with the other ministers saying the responses, and reads the texts of the Mass at the throne from a second Missal. He also blesses the incense at the throne, which is then brought to the celebrant at the altar, blesses the subdeacon and deacon after the singing of the readings, and the water at the Offertory. For the consecration, he kneels at the center of the sanctuary, so the subdeacon moves to the Epistle side; and he gives the final blessing.

Prayers at the foot of the altar

 Collects

 The bishop blesses the incense before the Gospel

The subdeacon kneels for the blessing of the water at the Offertory, which is done by the bishop from the throne.

Continue Reading this Article. . .

Photos of Pontifical Requiem with Bishop Morlino

Our recent photoposts for All Saints and All Souls were prepared in a bit of a rush while I was getting ready for a trip, and I overlooked these pictures of a Pontifical Requiem celebrated by His Excellency Robert Morlino, Bishop of Madison, Wisconsin. They are reproduced here from Fr Z’s blog, with our thanks; our thanks also to Bishop Morlino, who has strongly encouraged the traditional Rite both by word and his personal example.

The Mass was celebrated especially for the deceased priests and bishops of the diocese, hence the episcopal and priestly birettas set on the bier.

Tradition is for the young!

Continue Reading this Article. . .

“Irreversible” Round-Up

For a variety of reasons, I thought it best to wait a while before saying anything about the now famous (or infamous) “irreversible” speech which the Holy Father recently gave to the participants in the 68th Italian National Liturgical Week. A number of good articles have come out in the week following its publication.

- Canonist Dr Edward Peters, on his blog In the Light of the Law, addresses the proper object of the magisterial authority which the Pope invoked in declaring that the post-Conciliar liturgical reform is “irreversible.” The sum of it is “… I think it can be confusing to the faithful for any prelate to ‘affirm with certainty’ and/or with ‘magisterial authority’ that liturgical reform is ‘irreversible’ precisely because such language connotes in Catholic minds the exercise of a charism given not to underscore the importance of what is being asserted, but rather, to identify certainly and without error either what is divinely revealed and thus to be believed or what is required to safeguard reverently the deposit of faith and thus to be definitely held.”

- Fr Zuhlsdorf begins his very useful commentary by stating “Given what I have seen and heard in Italy, my mind reels in dread at the very notion of a room full of Italian liturgists.” This is a completely reasonable reaction; the state of the liturgy in Italy is appalling, with a particular emphasis on very bad music. (For example, it is not an exaggeration to say that most churches sing the sixth mode triple Alleluia at every single Mass outside of Lent.) I especially enjoyed his comments on these words from the Pope’s discourse: “Just as there is no human life without a heartbeat, so too without the beating Heart of Christ there is no liturgical action.

“Our heart rates speed up and slow down according to activity, etc. The resting heartbeat is a baseline which is consistent, even, continuous. When our heartbeat is erratic there are problems. An arrhythmia can result in cardiac death. This is probably what happened with the artificial imposition of many liturgical changes after the Council (not actually called for by the Council Fathers in SC): liturgical arrhythmias. … Screw around with the Church’s liturgical heartbeat, and you wind up with what we have seen in the Church for the last 50 years, as virtually every aspect of Catholic life has become enervated, weak, lethargic and even necrotic.”

- We can always rely on Fr Hunwicke for intelligent commentary on any matter, and particularly on the true scope of Papal authority. (The dashes here are in the original, and do not represent omissions.)

“...But the liturgical texts and practices established after the Council are themselves not immutable. If a papal instruction, such as that of S Pius V in Quo primum, was in itself subject to change ... and Bergoglio seems to assume that it was changeable ... then clearly what Blessed Paul VI did, and what the current occupant of the Roman See now says ... are themselves changeable; they cannot be set in stone for ever.

Pope Francis has exactly as much papal authority as S Pius V. He does not have a milligram less.

And he does not have a milligram more.

And if it was acceptable (the Holy Father seems to assume that it was) for ‘experts’, in the decades before the Council, to explain at great length what (in their view) was wrong with the Liturgy as it then existed ... ... then it acceptable now for us to explain, at any length we like, what (in our view) is wrong with the Liturgy as it is done now in so many places.”

- Geoffrey Kirk, who writes a very funny blog called Ignatius His Conclave, gives an excellent example of how liturgical reform was reversed within the Anglican church.

- I particularly commend to our readers’ attention an article by Fr Hugh Somerville-Knapman OSB, on his blog Dominus mihi adjutor. Fr Hugh rightly, in my view, says that the speech itself is really not all that interesting, and in any case, much of what it does say is at best unclear. (The Pope speaks, for example, of “practices that disfigure the liturgy.” It would take no time at all to come up a list of perfectly licit practices of the reformed liturgy which one may reasonably regard as disfigurements; leaving the celebrant to choose the Eucharistic prayer comes immediately to mind.)

“What is remarkable is the nostalgia that lies so close to the surface in so many commentators in the mainline reform movement. Seeing in the eyes of traditionalists the mote of a nostalgia for a golden age that never was, they fail to see the beam of the same in their own eyes. …

If ever there was a group stuck in a rut of nostalgia it is the mainline liturgical reformers. They have not seen that the world, and the Church, have moved on from the heady days of hippies, free love, the brotherhood of man and revolution in everything that marked, indeed scarred, the 60s. The mainline liturgical reformers have failed in their express intention of producing a liturgy that engages modern people actively, a failure proved by the precipitous decline in Mass attendance since the reform was introduced.

Blaming social change and militant secularism is just passing of the buck and does not stand much scrutiny. It was precisely such a changed and more secular society that the reformers sought to accommodate liturgically. … ”

- Matthew Schmitz published an article yesterday on the Catholic Herald about the continually growing interest in the traditional Rite on the part of the young, with the one title I most wish I had thought of myself, “The Kids Are Old Rite.”

“Who are these terrifying young traditionalists? Step into a quiet chapel in New York and you will find an answer. There, early each Saturday morning, young worshippers gather in secret. They are divided by sex: women on the left, men on the right. Dressed in denim and Birkenstocks, with the occasional nose piercing, they could be a group of loiterers on any downtown sidewalk. But they have come here with a purpose. As a bell rings, they rise in unison. A hooded priest approaches the altar and begins to say Mass in Latin. During Communion, they kneel on the bare floor where an altar rail should be.

In a city where discretion is mocked and vice goes on parade, the atmosphere of reverence is startling. ...”

- Just a few thoughts of my own then, to wrap up.

The post-Conciliar liturgical reform has been in every way a complete success. The Fathers of Vatican II knew ahead of time that the letter of Sacrosanctum Concilium would be repeatedly disobeyed in the actual execution of the reform, and approved of this, knowing that the same Spirit which inspired such holy foreknowledge within them would lead to greater and better achievements than they themselves could ever have envisioned. The committees that produced the reform acted from only the very highest and purest motives; their liturgical scholarship was impeccable in every way, nor has any part of it subsequently been proved wrong or outdated.

Shortly after the promulgation of Sacrosanctum Concilium, an article in the Osservatore Romano proclaimed that the Council had officially embraced and approved of the goals of the first Liturgical Movement. And indeed, the wildest hopes of Dom Gueranger, the Blessed Schuster, Fr Fortescue and Dom Beauduin have been fulfilled in our times. Liturgical piety now flourishes as never before among the Catholic faithful, who have almost all joyfully embraced the reformed rites.

Of course, every movement within the Church, be it ever so obviously led and driven by the Spirit, encounters some resistance from reactionaries. “Reactionary” is a word to conjure with, as are the many abstract nouns which are helpfully employed to categorize the unhealthy motives lurking in the dark corners of the reactionary mind. The –isms take the lead here, with “clericalism” as the perennial favorite, alongside “triumphalism” and “formalism”; beyond them wait “rigidity”, “nostalgia”, and a panoply of others. In this most blessed age, however, the reactionaries are so few, their complaints so unreasonable, their challenge so baseless, that there is no need to respond to them at all.

Indeed, given the perfect triumph of the reform, it is difficult to see why any need was felt at all to assert (whether directly or obliquely) that it cannot be undone. We may even question whether such an assertion is altogether prudent, since it might suggest to some a degree of insecurity about its future, which is of course wholly unwarranted.

Gaudete and Rorate Photopost 2016 (Part 3)

Our third and final post of your photos of Gaudete Sunday liturgies and Rorate Masses, and once again, our thanks to all those who sent them in. Our next set of photoposts will be for Christmas and its octave; a reminder will be posted during the coming week.

St Michael - Budapest, Hungary

Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe - LaCrosse, Wisconsin

Pontifical Mass celebrated by His Eminence Raymond Cardinal Burke, who founded the shrine during his time as the bishop of LaCrosse. (The Mass was a Rorate Mass, although not celebrated by candlelight.)

Continue Reading this Article. . .

George Weigel Vs. Liturgical Improvisation

In an article published yesterday on the website of First Things, George Weigel takes the clergy to task for the less-than-happy results of the widespread habit of liturgical improvisation. The tone of the article is such that I am sure that Fr Zuhlsdorf is correct when he says about it, “He must have had an experience recently which set him off.”

Citing the words of Sacrosanctum Concilium that “no . . . person, not even a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority,” Prof. Weigel writes,

… Auto-editing or flat-out rewriting the prescribed text of the Mass is virtually epidemic among priests who attended seminary in the late Sixties, Seventies, or early Eighties; it’s less obvious among the younger clergy. But whether indulged by old, middle-aged, or young, it’s obnoxious and it’s an obstacle to prayer. …
… after more than four decades of priest-celebrants trying to be Johnny Carson, Bob Barker, Alex Trebek, or whomever, this act is getting very old. Father, you’re just not very good at it. …
So please, fathers in Christ, spare us these attempts at creativity, or user-friendliness, or whatever it is you think you’re doing. They just don’t work. Please just pray the black and do the red. And the worship Vatican II intended will be much enhanced thereby.

Of course, priests should Say (or “Pray”, if one prefers) the Black and Do the Red, as Fr Z has been very rightly exhorting them to do for years. But I cannot help but think that Dr. Weigel has diagnosed a symptom, while referring only obliquely to the disease which has caused it. He is right to say that “… in metaphorically thumbing his nose at the Council’s clear injunction (not to mention the rubrics in the Missal), Father Freelance is … asserting his own superiority over the liturgy.” But the simple fact of the matter is that where such a sense of superiority exists, it is both de jure and de facto very much encouraged by the current liturgical discipline of the Church.

De jure, the post-Conciliar liturgical reform gave the clergy a degree of liberty to decide what shall be said or sung, how it shall be said or sung, whether it shall be said or sung, and with what rituals accompanying, that was far broader than anything known within the Church before 1969. (Yes, St Justin Martyr says in the mid-2nd century that the celebrant of the Eucharist “offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability.” There is a very good reason why this passage of the First Apology, chapter 67, is always cited by those who favor liturgical improvisation; it is the only such passage available to cite.)

Just to give an example or two: prior to the reform, every sung Mass of the Roman Rite on the First Sunday of Advent began, as it had begun for centuries, with the Gregorian Introit Ad te levavi, and every low Mass began with the prayers before the altar, after which the priest read Ad te levavi. Since 1969, the ubiquitous and fatal rubric “or another suitable song” has given him (or the persons to whom he has delegated responsibility) permission to sing more or less anything, since inevitably, everyone has their own ideas about what sort of song is really suitable.

There are also plenty of places where the priest is permitted to make up what he will say, like the supposedly “very brief” (brevissimis) words by which he, or a deacon, or a lay minister (as options multiply) may introduce the day’s Mass to the faithful, and the exhortations which begin rites such as the prophecies of the Easter vigil or the processions on Candlemas and Palm Sunday. One formulation of this permission, “vel similibus verbis – or with similar words,” occurs eight times in the rubrics of the 2002 Latin edition of the Missal. The Prayers of the Faithful have a fixed form, but no fixed content at all.

Even discounting these permissions, it is impossible for a Catholic priest to celebrate the modern Rite without having to continually choose among options. Examples could be given almost without end, but I am sure they are well known to our readers. Suffice it to say that the multiplication of options is not even excluded from the very heart of the Rite, the Eucharistic Prayer. Here, Father is compelled, whether he will so or not, to make a choice among at least four options, often many more, guided by almost nothing.

When the novelty of multiple Eucharistic Prayers was introduced into the Roman Rite, it was often justified by appealing to the practice of the other ancient rites of Christianity, especially the Eastern rites, which all have more than one anaphora. Very rarely did anybody bother to point out that although the Byzantine Rite, for example, does indeed have two anaphoras, each is appointed for certain days; that of St Basil the Great is said on ten days of the year, and that of St John Chrysostom on every other day. A Byzantine priest is not at liberty to say, “It may be the First Sunday of Lent, but I’m in a Chrysostom mood today,” and decide to use the latter. But when a priest uses the modern Roman Rite, he is never required to choose any particular Eucharistic Prayer, not even the venerable Roman Canon. The rubrics of the Missal offer no more than suggestions as to when they may be “suitably” chosen.

Now there is, of course, a significant difference in theory between choosing among licit options, or making up things to say where this is permitted by law, and the improvisations which Prof. Weigel rightly decries. But in practice, once the clergy were given such a broad degree of liberty to fashion and refashion so much of the liturgy as they saw fit, it was completely unrealistic to imagine that they would NOT apply this liberty to the rest of the liturgy as well. Basic experience of human nature should have made it obvious that in almost any climate, but especially in the revolutionary atmosphere which prevailed in the Church in the later 1960s, the bounds set by liturgical law would be effectively ignored.

And now we come to the de facto part. The abuses of this new-found liberty were for a long time encouraged by an almost complete absence of will to restrain them. In many parts of the world, this is still very much the case to this day. Prof. Weigel is certainly correct, at least as far as the U.S. is concerned, to say that the problem is now greatly lessened among the younger clergy. But his appeal to Pray the Black and Do the Red will almost certainly fall on deaf ears among those priests “who attended seminary in the late Sixties, Seventies, or early Eighties.” It is completely unrealistic to imagine that they will suddenly agree to obey the law if their bishops did nothing to restrain their breaking of it in a matter of such importance for so many years. Truth to tell, many of those bishops were in fact the very same men who put their signatures to Sacrosanctum Concilium in the first place, almost none of whom could later be found to say to their priests, “Thus far shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed.”

Where I write above “encouraged by the current liturgical discipline of the Church”, I wish to emphasize the word “current.” Taking St Justin’s description of the “improvised” Eucharist as a starting point, experience must surely have taught the Church in antiquity the same thing which it is teaching Her now – that giving people broad liberty to fashion and refashion the liturgy is a terrible idea. There is absolutely no reason why this lesson cannot be applied to the post-Conciliar liturgical reform. There is no reason why the Church cannot say to Her priests, “You will say this Eucharistic Prayer on this day, and no other, that one on that day, and no other. These are the words that are said before the Candlemas procession, these and no others. This is the only vernacular hymn in this language that may substitute Ad te levavi on First Advent.” And so on.

Of course, the Church must also be willing to train Her priests to be obedient sons, to recognize themselves as the servants of the liturgy, not its masters, as men called to be formed by the liturgy, not to form it. But She must also be willing to give them a liturgy that truly forms them, and does not need to be formed by them, one that spiritually rewards its faithful servants, and needs no master other than Herself. Until this lesson is relearned, She has sown the wind, and must now continue to reap the whirlwind.

Epiphany Photopost 2016 (Updated)

As always, we are very grateful to all those who sent in photos of their Epiphany liturgies and blessings. We have a few photos of the Blessing of the Waters in the Maronite Rite, and I am also including, at Fr Kocik’s suggestion, a video of the Byzantine version of the same blessing, filmed by a river in Slovakia. The next photopost will be for the feast of the Purification/Presentation on February 2nd. Evangelize through beauty!

(This post has been updated with some photographs sent in by Father Zuhlsdorf, from the church of St Mary’s Pine Bluff in Wisconsin - gratias, optime Pater!)

Our Lady of the Assumption & St Gregory - London, England

Organized by Juventutem London, and sung by their schola. Follows these links to visit their blog, Facebook page and Flickr stream.

Genuflection at the words of the Gospel “...and falling down they adored Him.”

Proclamation of the Movable Feasts

Blessing of Chalk

Continue Reading this Article. . .

Even More Beautiful Photos from Populus Summorum Pontificum

A reader has sent in a link to a really stunning set of photos which were taken at the Populus Summorum Pontificum Pilgrimage to Rome recently. The photos are by Emanuele Fiocchi and give a wonderful sense of what it must have been like to be there. You can see the full set here, but I have posted a selection below in no particular order which give a general flavour. Readers will no doubt be able to identify some of those pictured - I’m pretty sure I spotted Fr Z!

Continue Reading this Article. . .

Sacred Liturgy Conference with Fr. Z at St John Cantius, Chicago

A Sacred Liturgy Conference conducted by Fr. Z (Fr John Zuhlsdorf) will take place at St John Cantius, Chicago over the first weekend in October. The schedule is as follows:

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 3

5:30 pm - Registration (Church Hall—Lower Level)
5:30 pm - Bookstore (Church Hall—Lower Level)
6:00 pm - Welcome (Church Hall—Lower Level)
6:00 pm - Dinner (Church Hall—Lower Level)
7:00 pm - Conference I (Church Hall—Lower Level)
7:30 pm - Latin High Mass (1962 Missale Romanum, Extraordinary Form) (Church) - Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, Celebrant and Homilist
7:30 pm - Confessions are heard during Mass
8:45 pm - First Friday Eucharistic Exposition, Litany of the Sacred Heart, Compline, Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament (Church)

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 4

10:00 am - Registration (Church Vestibule)
10:30 am - Latin High Mass (1962 Missale Romanum, Extraordinary Form) (Church) - Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, Celebrant and Homilist

Music for Mass
Missa Choralis in F, Claudio Casciolini (1697-1760)
Ave Verum, Samuel Webbe (1740-1816)
Venite Populi, Josef Rheinberger (1839-1901)
Cantate Domino Choir

10:30 am - Confessions are heard during Mass
12:00 pm - Late Registration (Church Vestibule)
12:00 pm - Bookstore (until 2:00 p.m.) (Church Hall—Lower Level)
12:30 pm - Lunch (Church Hall—Lower Level)
01:30 pm - Conference II (Church)
02:00 pm - Eucharistic Exposition, Holy Rosary & First Saturday Devotions in honor of Our Lady of Fatima (Church)
03:00 pm - Conference III (Church)
03:30 pm - Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament (Church)

SUNDAY, OCTOBER 5

12:30 pm - Latin High Mass, (1962 Missale Romanum, Extraordinary Form) (Church) - Fr. John Zuhlsdorf, Celebrant and Homilist
Music for Mass
Missa Brevis in G Major, KV 140, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-1791)
Ave Verum, Nicholas White (b. 1969)
Tantum Ergo, Gabriel Fauré (1845-1924)
Resurrection Choir and Orchestra

12:30 pm - Confessions are heard during Mass

Full details including the registration form are available over at the St John Cantius website.