Amy Welborn has some well-chosen comments on those who seem to think Francis is so remarkably better/different/whatever than his predecessor. Excerpts:
I’m startled by the number of people who are under the impression that Pope Benedict neglected to mention Jesus Christ, mercy or the poor during his pontificate. Who don’t understand the substantial reforms Pope Benedict undertook over the past few years. So for example: Pope Francis mentioned the danger of the Church becoming seen as just another NGO, to wide acclaim – from some of the same quarters who have looked askance at Pope Benedict making exactly the same points – and putting them into action (as in his actions, for example, regarding Caritas last year ). The post below this one tweaks that reflex – and it’s a reflex to be aware of...
A few days ago, a church historian was quoted as saying, “You have to remember that Benedict was a clotheshorse.” What that expert fails to recognize was that Benedict’s attention to papal garb was not about vanity – I mean – really. It was about what he was always about: history And not history as a museum, out of an antiquarian interest, but as a link from the present to the past. The red shoes – so maligned even by Catholics who should know better – are a symbol of blood. Blood , people. The blood of the martyrs and the blood of Christ on which His vicar stands, and through him, all of us. Popes – yes, even John XXIII and Paul VI – wore them until John Paul II stopped. Then Benedict reinstated them. That is, he humbled himself before history and symbol and put the darn things on...
For me, it comes down to this. Both of these Popes were and are pastors. Both have given their lives for us, for Christ. We can – and should be open to being – taught by both. All I’m saying is that – as Pope Francis himself has acknowledged in his own words these past few days – Pope Benedict was all about Christ. He spent 8 years as your Pope, “proposing Jesus Christ” through his words and actions – even his red shoes. If Pope Francis’ actions so far preach Christ more clearly to you then so be it. Christ is who is important, and we are a Church of great diversity for a reason. But what has been so bizarre and even saddening over the past few days is a tone and implication that Benedict was somehow about something else besides Jesus Christ...
The “changes” that Benedict made to the liturgical direction of the Church are not expressions of his aesthetic or taste. What Benedict did was to implement the Church’s liturgy in the Church’s practice. There are documents. Decrees and such. Books. Rubrics. Believe it or not, Benedict’s reset button was really nothing more than pointing us to what we are supposed to be doing anyway. If you don’t believe me, read them yourself. There is a deeper theological and spiritual reasoning and structure as well, but really, the basic goal was: fidelity to what the Church offers. If you read Ratzinger on liturgy, his thinking is quite pastoral. It basically comes down to: Every Catholic has the right to the Church’s liturgy.
Along those lines,
Father Z. explains what humble liturgy looks like. Excerpts:
...Some people are saying, “O how wonderful it is to get rid of all the symbols of office and power and be humble like the poor.”
When I first learned to say the older form of the Mass of the Roman Rite, that is to say, when I first learned how to say Mass, because there has never been a single of day of my priesthood when I couldn’t say it, I admit that I was deeply uncomfortable with some of the gestures prescribed by the rubrics. I even resisted them. For example, the kissing of the objects to be given to the priest, and the priest and the kissing of the priest’s hands… that gave me the willies.
I resisted those solita oscula because I had fallen into the trap of thinking that they made me look too important.
The fact is that none of those gestures were about me at all. They are about the priest insofar as he is alter Christus, not insofar as he is “John”. For “John” all of that would be ridiculous. For Father, alter Christus, saying Mass, it is barely enough.
When you see the deacon and subdeacon in the older form of Holy Mass holding, for example, the edges of the priest’s cope when they are in procession, or when you see them kissing the priest’s hand, or bowing to him, or waiting on him or deferring to him or – what in non-Catholic eyes appears to be something like adoration or emperor worship – you are actually seeing them preparing the priest for his sacrificial slaughter on the altar of Golgotha.
It is the most natural thing in the human experience to treat with loving reverence the sacrifice to be offered to God. The sacrificial lambs were pampered and given the very best care, right up to the moment when the knife sliced their necks.
The Catholic priest is simultaneously the victim offered on the altar. All the older, traditional ceremonies of the Roman Rite underscore this foundational dimension of the Mass. If we don’t see that relationship of priest, altar, and victim in every Holy Mass, then the way Mass has been celebrated has failed. If we don’t look for that relationship, then we are not really Catholic. Mass is Calvary...
Rocco Palmo has some interesting comments on the way in which Pope Francis is charting his own course with a distinctly steely determination. Excerpts:
...Extraordinary as the response to his sincerity and simplicity has been over these days – a feeling running far beyond Rome and Argentina – Jorge Bergoglio's success at defining himself as himself on the world stage has come thanks to a less visible, yet equally key trait of the 266th Pope: his steely sense of determination. If he lacked it, he never could've proceeded or been received as he has in such a short stretch of time... and to be sure, its early quiet flashes are merely shaping up as a sneak preview of the battle of wills which is almost certain to define his pontificate.
As things pick up steam, a lesson from the Pope's past bears recalling: on ending his term as provincial of Argentina, then-Fr Bergoglio's intensity of conviction and grit served to divide his confreres so severely that he was made to leave the country until things could simmer down.
Then again, perhaps even that bodes well. Given the thick sea he'd inherit, the times called for a strong figure to don the white – someone strong enough to keep his black pants and set the trappings at arm's length if he so chose. Yet most of all, in an office where practically every temptation and modern custom could quickly undermine the intent behind it, only a fool would ever have taken the name Francis...
...that is, unless he was driven to clear the high bar that comes with it.
Deacon Kandra amplifies much of that. Excerpts:
...Yes, as a few people have noted: there is much to be to be cherished in the ancient beauty and traditions of the liturgy we love, in the devotions we practice, in the languages we offer before God in prayer. This is our heritage and our legacy and all that, together, does draw is closer to a sense of the eternal.
But: just as Benedict began our Lent with a lesson in letting go, Francis is closing this penitential season with one about stripping bare—getting back to basics.
Maybe these two popes aren’t as different as some think – and will serve, together, as the two great teachers of the New Evangelization...
No comments:
Post a Comment