"I Feel Pretty, Oh So Pretty...."
(PHOTO: Institute of Christ the Sovereign Priest)
A correspondent just wrote with the following note: "Don't throw away your grandmother's old lace tablecloths. It appears they have a a redeemed role in liturgical drag...."
Anyone getting all kinds of apocalyptic about the need for "more masculine priests" (as if bringing in the Village People will solve all problems?) needs to take a good look at this picture and think for a minute. This is not the most macho-looking menangerie I've seen in this business, Fr. Mason.
Before we go incandescent about anklets, people, remember at least that they're not worn supposedly in the name of God. And, for the millionth time, there was no lace to be found at the first Mass... so why mess with a good thing?
Say what you will about his sartorial style, but at least Jesus was in touch with the people.
-30-
posted by Rocco Palmo at 16:51
10 Comments:
The figure in red, sounding like a member of the Kennedy clan in another scuffle with the law, asks:
"Do you KNOW who I am?????"
Of course, YOU do, Rocco Sambucco-Brunello!
It was amusing to hear one of the RAI commentators yell "Innovazione!" over the TV feed when this Eminent Guardian of Undeviating Fidelity to the Prescribed Liturgical Text prefaced the "Annuntio vobis" (as per the prescribed Ordo Rituum Conclavis: I checked, of course, and it's his verbis, not his aut similis verbis!) with his polyglot introduction to the brothers and sisters of the Western European languages!
I wonder if he's read Liturgiam authenticam! In the original, I mean!
That's "his aut similibus verbis" in Latin.
By the way, just what language is the original of "liturgiam authenticam?" No one who knew Latin would ever have come up with a title like that (or the even more bizarre "homosexualitatis problema), but someone who thought he knew a little Latin just might have come up with it as a translation from French or German.
If it's allowed to ask for an answer on this blog, I'd appreciate it if anyone could fill me in on the ideological import of all the bad Latin (cf. "ad orientam," as cited by John Allen) that's flooding the Catholic world. Can't blame this on Pope Benedict, who has both a scholar's and a speaker's knowledge of the language.
If you can find out who wrote the original of Liturgiam authenticam and in which language, you could end up richer than John Allen!
The Vatican website still has "qui sibi nomen imposuit Benedictum XVI," when Cardinal Medina (as did Pericle the Great before him in 1978) used the genitive in making the announcement, especially tricky given the number:-) (Medina: "qui sibi nomen imposuit Benedicti Decimi Sexti"; Felici: "Ioannis Pauli Primi").
I thought the American Carmelite, Fr. Reginald Foster, did all of that stuff. He said on Vatican Radio that he had worked on the translation of the new Pope's Sistine Chapel homily "the morning after."
Rock,
If they're an approved bunch (which they are), and if they're doing good (which they are), and if they're in touch with the people who retain a devotion to the '62 Rite and who derive spiritual sustenance from it (which they are), and if they're not waving lace in the streets (which they are not), would it be too terribly much to ask for you to let them be?
And I would add, masculine is as masculine does.
There were many things not present at the first Mass. I'm as ready as the next man to believe that there were lots of things pre VII that needed reform. But I've yet to hear a compelling reason why lace elicits such contempt here.
mlickonaATcoxDOTnet
I could have sworn I heard "nomen sibi" and "sexti decimi," but who knows? I was too busy trying to cope with NPR calling him Benedict XXVI.
And if the appositional genitive is good enough for Tacitus and the Vulgate, who are we to complain about a cardinal deacon?
Oh, and I have my doubts about Father Foster.
Lace was an archaism when I was a kid under Pius XII, but I'm not sure what the problem with it is. Maybe it invites parody, but the problem there may be more with the parodist.
Gene, twice in 1978 and again last April the genitive was used. I wasn't complaining about the Cardinal Deacon's use of it, just pointing out that the Vatican website (those people have the announcement ARCHIVED on their own website for goodness' sake) goes with the accusative (so did Osservatore Romano). Seems like it ought to be one or the other, and that two Cardinal Deacons in three tries probably got it right.
Care to elaborate on your "doubts about Father Foster"? Or is that an example of the use of the "clerical elliptical"? :-)
And anyone who thinks the problem with lace is with the parodist hasn't met the youngsters who are wearing it.
1. This is made to order for Fr. Bryce Sibley, were he still blogging - very "POD" - pious over-devotional." Which is meant in the kindest sense when he says it.
2. Beyond that, I'll confine myself to affirming Matt Lickona's comments. This kind of thing works for a certain subculture of the church - and I judge prelate or cleric ultimately by what they do, not what they wear (so long, of course, as what they wear meets liturgical or other norms).
As for that Gyro seems to have met a young traddie who gave hima bad vibe. I have no idea about that, but I'm wagering it wasn't Fr. Sibley.
best regards,
Richard Lender
athelstane@gmail.com
Here's my two cents.
First, the more lace and the more colorful vestments, the better, though lace vestments are a bugger to clean. However, I think that the main focus of Rocco's wrath was not so much the "gin, lace, and backbiting" crowd, but the silly extremism of the jeremiad against effeminecy in the clergy by a vocation's director that has been circulated around the internet, of which Rocco's example is a good counter-argument. The Institute of Christ the King may be doing great things for the Church, but they don't strike me as the type of people that embody Anglo-American stereotypes of masculinity. Certainly, many of the clerical heros (and deservedly so) of the conservative Catholic movement would not meet this vocation director's discriminating standards in masculine behavior in men.
My nastier rejoinder to the essay and those who praised it would be that morbidly obese men who criticize "softness" and "effeminacy" in others ought to look in the mirror first. My more serious objection is that to treat "effeminate" mannerisms as a piece with lazy indolence, homosexuality, delicacy, etc is not reasonable. The real issue is whether the seminarian or the priest is a grown-up who takes personal responsibility for himself. Forcing a seminarian to correct a lisp or other "effiminate" mannerisms (as defined by whom?) is a cosmetic solution to a pseudo-problem that has little to do with the issue of whether the seminarian has what it takes to be a responsible (and hopefully happy) priest. It's one thing to insist that seminarians not call each other by girl's names. It's another thing to insist on highly subjective and arbitrary standards of "masculinity" that are better suited for the steel mill than celebrating the liturgy, administering a parish, or teaching classes.
Patrick Rothwell
By the way, who is that guy?
As far as I know, Benedicti and Benedictum are the same word in Latin, so it may be a tempest an a teapot. And it seems (not a medieval/ecclesiastical Latinist) that the trend is toward the genitive rather than the original nominative/accusative in apposition or dative, so I would think the genitive just came more naturally.
My doubts about Father Foster are (a) that he seems a bit of a self-promoter and (b) based on what I've seen on a classical discussion group I belong to his Latin isn't all that hot.
As to lace, anyone from San Francisco knows that there's no correlation between masculinity and sexual orientation. And as to judging by the promoters of an idea, remember that Rowan Williams, the orthodox patriarchs, and the more extreme bloggers on Amy Welborn's site all agree that the typical suburban parish is deficient in Marian devotion.
That ain't no guy, that's an Eminent Dude, Jorge Eduardo S.R.E. Card. Medina-Estevez
Post a Comment
<< Home