I went to York yesterday (Saturday) for the annual Latin Mass Society pilgrimage. Part of it involves a procession through the city centre past the shrine of St Margaret Clitheroe in the Shambles, saying the Rosary as we go. It's always instructive to hear the comments- mostly bemused, some offensive- from bystanders. Yesterday as we entered the Shambles I heard 'Dunno. Must be summat to do with Museum'.
There's food for thought. What we think of as bearing witness to our faith (mis)understood as an exercise in historical re-enactment. Well, there were the men leading it in birettas and cassocks, but the rest of us looked pretty early-21st century. People are so used now to seeing re-enactment whether it's on TV where no historical documentary is complete without it or at historic sites, where women in crinolines and men in powdered wigs try to engage you (I still treasure the memory of the 'footman' at one establishment who greeted us with 'Hi guys'). So obviously this must be what people doing something inexplicable but clearly religious and in 'costume' must be up to.
So is that how people view religion now? Something to do with 'heritage' that a few nostalgics engage in? And is there a risk ( I know there is) that attachment to the older forms of Catholic devotion is in part an exercise in nostalgia for a time when the Church was so much more certain and solid?
Sunday 30 March 2014
Thursday 20 March 2014
Always With Us
The poor, that is. My parish got involved with a local food bank a year ago, just after Pope Francis' election and in response to his insistence that the Church should do more for the poor. My feeling was (and is) that the Church as an institution does and always has done a good deal for the poor; the challenge is for individuals to do more - we're a fairly prosperous congregation and not many of us are inclined to sell everything we have and give the proceeds to the poor, me included. So, we donate food weekly or as and when we can.
The parishioner who started the involvement and does a great deal of work around it addressed us last Sunday and explained that the bank's remit had widened in the last year. Originally help was given for a few weeks only to families where the wage-earner had recently lost their job and was waiting for benefits to kick in . Now it seems, those who have had benefits sanctioned (i.e. withdrawn for a period, usually for non-compliance or misconduct) are receiving food parcels and 'repeat' clients are being helped. I found myself wondering whether, as the state benefits system is reformed to reduce the abuses which we all know have been going on, the new systems of voluntary charitable help will find themselves being exploited by the work-shy. I also wondered if I was being uncharitable in thinking this and in my scepticism about what exactly constitutes 'poverty' nowadays. Obviously not being able to afford food qualifies, but why are people who have recently been in work unable to fund such a basic need for a few weeks? Because they waste money on unnecessary things when in work? Who am I to judge? But are we justified in handing out help to anyone who has fallen on hard times irrespective of why that is so? Is the concept of the 'deserving poor' valid? Someone recently suggested that if we give to the 'deserving' poor we are dealing in justice; it's the 'undeserving' poor who need our charity. I carry on donating on the grounds that if I don't someone who genuinely needs help may miss out.
Then today's gospel was the story of Dives (only he's never called that now)and Lazarus. It's not a parable with much to commend it to liberals. Dives is not damned for being rich,but for allowing his riches to blind him to the needs of others and refusing to share them. Lazarus attains Abraham's bosom by being literally long-suffering: he simply waits patiently in the hope of something coming his way, rather than demanding his 'rights'. Like the Canaanite woman he is content with scraps from the table and that humility and hope sanctifies him.
The parishioner who started the involvement and does a great deal of work around it addressed us last Sunday and explained that the bank's remit had widened in the last year. Originally help was given for a few weeks only to families where the wage-earner had recently lost their job and was waiting for benefits to kick in . Now it seems, those who have had benefits sanctioned (i.e. withdrawn for a period, usually for non-compliance or misconduct) are receiving food parcels and 'repeat' clients are being helped. I found myself wondering whether, as the state benefits system is reformed to reduce the abuses which we all know have been going on, the new systems of voluntary charitable help will find themselves being exploited by the work-shy. I also wondered if I was being uncharitable in thinking this and in my scepticism about what exactly constitutes 'poverty' nowadays. Obviously not being able to afford food qualifies, but why are people who have recently been in work unable to fund such a basic need for a few weeks? Because they waste money on unnecessary things when in work? Who am I to judge? But are we justified in handing out help to anyone who has fallen on hard times irrespective of why that is so? Is the concept of the 'deserving poor' valid? Someone recently suggested that if we give to the 'deserving' poor we are dealing in justice; it's the 'undeserving' poor who need our charity. I carry on donating on the grounds that if I don't someone who genuinely needs help may miss out.
Then today's gospel was the story of Dives (only he's never called that now)and Lazarus. It's not a parable with much to commend it to liberals. Dives is not damned for being rich,but for allowing his riches to blind him to the needs of others and refusing to share them. Lazarus attains Abraham's bosom by being literally long-suffering: he simply waits patiently in the hope of something coming his way, rather than demanding his 'rights'. Like the Canaanite woman he is content with scraps from the table and that humility and hope sanctifies him.
Thursday 13 March 2014
40 Days For Life
Over at Doncaster again this morning for a couple of hours outside the abortion clinic. The number of people coming to the vigil is small (between 10 and 20, I gather), but has gradually increased during the first week. We prayed and at one point decided to do so silently. That for me was a wonderful half hour: I find that communal recitation of the Rosary or indeed any prayer becomes mechanical and too rapid for any meaningful meditation. Perhaps as a 'revert' who has struggled (and still struggles) with the great prominence of Mary in Catholic thinking and with the Rosary as a means of prayer I'm just not up to speed with its use. At all events I enjoyed the beautiful silence, which in view of the traffic on this very busy road might seem odd; but for that time I barely noticed it.
It was while we were in silence that a man came over and asked what we were praying about. I told him briefly, but had little chance to talk, as the policy seems to be to hand out a flyer with the website address and tell people to look at that and someone interrupted and did this. Which of course effectively closed the conversation down and also made it seem as though we don't want to talk to people, even reasonable and polite ones. Little contact otherwise: a couple of car horns, which could mean anything and a passing
'w-----s!'.
I've been going when I can (which is rarely, because of other parish commitments) to a series of talks at a local church on the Theology of the Body. Because I'm only dipping in, I find it all a little difficult to follow, likewise Christopher West's magisterial exposition, which I'm slowly making my way through. It's such an important topic, both for the Church and society at large, but it's barely filtered through to the ordinary Catholic, not least because of the often densely philosophical language it's cast in. This is not John Paul II's fault: you can't expect Popes to teach at a level suitable for the average person (though Benedict XVI was pretty good at making things comprehensible for what used to be called the intelligent general reader), so where are the intermediaries? What have bishops done too encourage priests to pass the ideas on to the faithful? What have most priests done off their own bat? Nothing much, evidently. And yet it seems so clear that many of the problems of our society and age- the disintegration of the family, the marginalisation of fathers, abortion, depressed and suicidal children, discarded old people- arise because relationships between men and women have become dysfunctional. We can't return to Eden, the Pope seems to be saying, but with grace and a correct understanding of our male/female nature and our need to give and receive in love we can aspire to a true economy of love. More on this when I understand more!
Got my first view recently! No comment, but I like comments, so anyone who drops in... Just keep it reasonable. Critical is fine.
It was while we were in silence that a man came over and asked what we were praying about. I told him briefly, but had little chance to talk, as the policy seems to be to hand out a flyer with the website address and tell people to look at that and someone interrupted and did this. Which of course effectively closed the conversation down and also made it seem as though we don't want to talk to people, even reasonable and polite ones. Little contact otherwise: a couple of car horns, which could mean anything and a passing
'w-----s!'.
I've been going when I can (which is rarely, because of other parish commitments) to a series of talks at a local church on the Theology of the Body. Because I'm only dipping in, I find it all a little difficult to follow, likewise Christopher West's magisterial exposition, which I'm slowly making my way through. It's such an important topic, both for the Church and society at large, but it's barely filtered through to the ordinary Catholic, not least because of the often densely philosophical language it's cast in. This is not John Paul II's fault: you can't expect Popes to teach at a level suitable for the average person (though Benedict XVI was pretty good at making things comprehensible for what used to be called the intelligent general reader), so where are the intermediaries? What have bishops done too encourage priests to pass the ideas on to the faithful? What have most priests done off their own bat? Nothing much, evidently. And yet it seems so clear that many of the problems of our society and age- the disintegration of the family, the marginalisation of fathers, abortion, depressed and suicidal children, discarded old people- arise because relationships between men and women have become dysfunctional. We can't return to Eden, the Pope seems to be saying, but with grace and a correct understanding of our male/female nature and our need to give and receive in love we can aspire to a true economy of love. More on this when I understand more!
Got my first view recently! No comment, but I like comments, so anyone who drops in... Just keep it reasonable. Critical is fine.
Sunday 9 March 2014
Ordinary and Extraordinary
Yesterday I went to the cathedral for the monthly Traditional Latin Mass(TLM) ,organised by the LMS. As ever it had a sense of transcendence, aided by the careful ritual and language. Unfortunately in this part of the world it attracts very few people- I think there were about 15 there and only 2 looked to be under 50. On the plus side there was for the second month running a young man serving. You read about lots of enthusiasm for it elsewhere particularly among young people, but I wonder... Are reports exaggerated to keep spirits up? Photos taken carefully to hide the fact that there are scarcely any more people in the pews than on the sanctuary?
This morning, the usual Ordinary Form parish Mass. 200+ attending, usual enthusiasm for hand-shaking and marching up to claim your Host irrespective of your spiritual state. Then again, perhaps I live in a parish of saints. Oh dear, I'm being a sourpuss!
In fact I can live happily with both forms of the Mass. I would prefer more frequent opportunities to attend the TLM. I love the Latin, the sense of timelessness and connection to the past; one of the most memorable moments of the 2010 papal visit for me was standing in a cold, damp Cofton Park and hearing Pope Benedict's frail, cracked old voice intoning 'Vere dignum et iustum est..' and thinking- this is what Newman and the saints knew. But the point is really the Sacrifice at the core of the Mass and you can still apprehend that through the clutter and chatter of the OF if you concentrate. It's the Mass, however you dress it up.
This morning, the usual Ordinary Form parish Mass. 200+ attending, usual enthusiasm for hand-shaking and marching up to claim your Host irrespective of your spiritual state. Then again, perhaps I live in a parish of saints. Oh dear, I'm being a sourpuss!
In fact I can live happily with both forms of the Mass. I would prefer more frequent opportunities to attend the TLM. I love the Latin, the sense of timelessness and connection to the past; one of the most memorable moments of the 2010 papal visit for me was standing in a cold, damp Cofton Park and hearing Pope Benedict's frail, cracked old voice intoning 'Vere dignum et iustum est..' and thinking- this is what Newman and the saints knew. But the point is really the Sacrifice at the core of the Mass and you can still apprehend that through the clutter and chatter of the OF if you concentrate. It's the Mass, however you dress it up.
Friday 7 March 2014
Lenten Activities
A busy day yesterday. In the morning I was in Doncaster to take my turn at the 40 Days For Life vigil at the local abortion clinic.(www.40daysforlife.com/sheffield). Despite the cold and rain there was a resilient group of up to 10 at a time praying the Rosary and the Stations of the Cross by the clinic entrance. While I was there only one car entered- quite a contrast with the clinic in Manchester where I've joined vigils in the past and where young women come and go constantly. Tried to keep in mind while praying that this is all about charity in its real sense: love for the helpless and marginalised, love even for those we disapprove of and those involved in evil.
In the evening to a parish discussion of themes from 'Evangelium Gaudii'. All rather downbeat and negative and it was only really after I'd got home and looked at the extracts we'd been considering that I realised why. Pope Francis has an unfortunate tendency to nag and carp at his flock (while being terribly nice to atheists,Muslims and anyone else non-Catholic). Here we were being admonished not to be sourpusses, not to squabble, not to..oh, I don't know. My mother had a tendency to do the same and it backfired:I eventually ignored her and so, of course, lost some perfectly sensible advice along with the negative stuff. Still, most people seem to lap it up. I shall stick with Pope Benedict's rather more measured and kindly Lenten addresses.
In the evening to a parish discussion of themes from 'Evangelium Gaudii'. All rather downbeat and negative and it was only really after I'd got home and looked at the extracts we'd been considering that I realised why. Pope Francis has an unfortunate tendency to nag and carp at his flock (while being terribly nice to atheists,Muslims and anyone else non-Catholic). Here we were being admonished not to be sourpusses, not to squabble, not to..oh, I don't know. My mother had a tendency to do the same and it backfired:I eventually ignored her and so, of course, lost some perfectly sensible advice along with the negative stuff. Still, most people seem to lap it up. I shall stick with Pope Benedict's rather more measured and kindly Lenten addresses.
Sunday 2 March 2014
Why blog?
I've been wondering for ages whether to blog or not. Does the world need another Catholic blogger? Do I really have anything to say that anyone else needs to hear? Well, since I amuse myself commenting on other people's blogs, I suppose I think I do.
I think the real motivation is that as a returned Catholic (I believe the correct term is the unlovely word 'revert') I have particular experiences and concerns that I am able to express and discuss with very few Catholics whom I meet in daily life. When I finally decided to return, after a few decades of atheism and a few years in the Church of England I did so because I could finally accept that the Catholic Church was the one true Church founded by Christ. That being so I also accept its teachings - all of them, not just the ones that suit me. This has involved a long process of trying to understand those teachings (especially about personal relationships) which are counter to what I had thought all my adult life and to conform my conscience to them. I have found this process (it's ongoing) though difficult, hugely rewarding, but...
Most Catholics I meet- I would say 95%-believe only what they find convenient and regard obedience to the Magisterium as optional. Their consciences seem mainly to validate whatever they choose to think and often what they choose to think has more in common with secular society than with the Church. So it feels a bit lonely, although I'm less bothered nowadays by ridicule or outright hostility (try defending 'openness to life' i.e. no artificial contraception in a meeting of parish activists). What has kept me going is faith in Christ, the teaching of Pope Benedict (a big influence on my decision to return) and the internet- I know I'm not alone!
So I hope to blog, if only occasionally, about my life as a returned Catholic and any issues as they come up. I hope, oo, to be positive! The Church has its problems as ever, but there are lots of positives. So I won't be complaining about sparse provision of Latin Mass or, having said that I still miss Pope Benedict, which should serve to position me, getting involved in Pope discussions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)