Don't look behind you, CES !

As an undergraduate, Ronnie Knox made a speech at the Oxford Union which had the distinction of being quoted in The Times’ leader. The remark which attracted attention was ‘The honourable gentlemen (the Government) have turned their backs upon their country and now have the effrontery to say they have the country behind them’.

It seems to me that the Catholic Education Service is in a fairly similar position, frankly. It has turned its back on the Catholic Faith, and yet tries to say that the Catholic Church is behind it.

Just the most recent of its idiocies is its appointment of Mr Greg Pope as Deputy Director; a decision which has attracted a great deal of justified criticism due to his truly appalling record whilst an MP of supporting anti-Life and pro-‘choice’ legislation, and proposals and motions which were fundamentally opposed to Catholic teaching. John Smeaton, Director of SPUC, gives full details of Mr Pope’s record in this post.

In a recent statement, Oona Stannard, the Director of CES, has suggested that this is a time for Catholics to ‘pull together’, and that ‘the undermining of Mr Pope saddens me’.

Well, I suppose I have to say that it saddens me too.

It saddens me that anyone calling himself a Catholic could publicly undermine his integrity in the way Mr Pope has done throughout his parliamentary career; and whilst we’re about it, it saddens me that he was appointed, and it saddens me even more that he has Ms Stannard’s support, and – apparently – that of the Bishops as well.

Ms Stannard says that she has ‘every confidence’ that Mr Pope will ‘uphold the Church’s teachings’. I wonder why ? I fully accept her assurance that he has said that he will do that; but I have to say that I find it hard to understand why anyone would accept such an undertaking from someone who has for so many years consistently failed to do exactly that.

The splendid Mac, over on Mulier Fortis, has made the valid point in her most recent post that ‘Yes, Catholics should pull together. But they should pull together in order to defend Catholic teaching in its entirety. The CES has failed to do that – it is the Catholic Education Service which is doing the undermining.’

I’m sorry : but the whole sequence of recent events show quite clearly, to my mind, that the CES has turned its back firmly upon the teachings of the Church from which it takes its name, and which finances it.

Let us at least ensure that it cannot now say that the Catholics of England & Wales are behind it : by making it clear to everyone that we’re in front of it, confronting it about its lack of support for the Faith, and the Faithful.

Where I'm coming from . . .

I’m slightly bewildered – and perhaps a little amused – by the fact that the most spectacular comments I have received to date have all been in respect of what was actually only intended to be a footnote !

Last Thursday, 22 April, I wrote a little post about serving Mass, and made the comment at the end that ‘for the ladies, I have written this for the gentlemen because that is the perceived norm, particularly in the UK; but if you attend Mass somewhere where women and girls serve, and feel inclined to do so, then the above applies to you as well !’

The subsequent comments have been interesting, and informed, and from resolutely opposite sides of the fence !

One result of the debate has been to make me feel it might be appropriate for me to clarify my own position on this sort of issue.

I am entirely conscious of the fact that the Church sometimes permits things which are (at least) offensive to a substantial percentage of her members; and I am not suggesting that the Church, or even the Holy Father, never makes a mistake.

My approach is this : however much I may personally dislike a particular position, providing that the Church permits it, then I must accept it. I may regret it, I may even – within proper bounds – campaign to have it changed; but I can’t say it’s wrong.

Further, and perhaps more importantly, not only is it a great exercise in humility and charity to accept things you don’t necessarily like – after all, someone presumably does, or it wouldn’t be like that in the first place – but it is also a fact that one can never sin by following the directions of one’s spiritual fathers in matters which are not already defined by the Faith.

So : whether or not I personally like, or agree with, female servers isn’t really the point; they are permitted, so I do nothing wrong by accepting that, whatever my personal views.

Some years ago, I got into a discussion (OK, an argument !) with a very earnest lady who was campaigning for some Church-aligned vegetarian organization; and who was arguing that it was morally wrong to eat meat, fish, or any living thing.

My reply was that as far as I could see she was perfectly entitled to dislike – even disapprove – of eating meat and fish; but that she could not be a genuine Christian and say that it was morally wrong; indeed, to do so was heresy.

For some reason this answer appeared to enrage her to a point where I thought that she might even physically attackme; and she also seemed unable to see my point – which was simply that, as we know that Our Blessed Lord ate meat and fish, it cannot be morally wrong (ie sinful) to do so, as to suggest that is to suggest that He committed sin – which is heretical.

Now; this isn’t actually off topic – because my point is that whatever my personal views are on the subject of female servers, or modern vestments, or the Ordinary Form, they are only my opinion.

Providing I accept that, it seems to me that I retain the right to try and persuade people that they are the right views; but the moment I try to suggest that any position which the Church has accepted is wrong – that is, by implication, morally wrong – then it seems to me that I lose that right, not least because I am probably sinning in all sorts of ways : pride and uncharity not least amongst them.

There are many times when I’m quite outspoken; you may, for example, recently have seen comments I have made on other blogs about the recent appointment of Mr Pope as Deputy Director of the CES : but it seems to me that I have every right to suggest that someone with such a publicly equivocal record on such fundamental Catholic principles as abortion has absolutely no right to put himself forward as a spokesman for the Church; and that if he does the Bishops should instantly – and if necessarily very publicly – dissociate themselves from him.

I hope, on the other hand, that you’ve never seen me, either in a post here or in a comment elsewhere, do more than express an opinion on any matter which is permitted by the Church : simply because I don’t think I have any right to do so. That does not mean, I repeat, that I’m not entitled to comment – even forcefully – and to try and persuade; all I mustn’t do is to suggest that those who disagree with me are actually wrong . . . not least because the humility to accept their opinions as valid, and the charity to endure them, are both virtues of which I am deeply in need !

fr Vincent McNabb OP, the famous English Dominican preacher, always used to end his public addresses for the Catholic Evidence Guild at Hyde Park Corner and Parliament Fields by saying ‘God Bless you all : I humbly beg your pardon’.

I know that I, for one, could benefit greatly from getting that attitude firmly fixed in my soul.

I’m not going to . . .

. . . go on about all the things in the press, and on all the other UK Catholic blogs just at present – the unCatholic Pope, the juvenile delinquent at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office, the apparent reluctant to let Catholic Voices say anything remotely Catholic – precisely because so many other people already have; and in most cases have done it far better than I could.

So, I just want to offer a very small thought, which was put into my mind by Fr Ray’s post last Friday ‘The Amorality of the Church’ : when he mentions that ‘no-one bothers with confessing anymore’.

I obviously don’t know; but I have to say that my own impression is that frequent confession seems to be fairly uncommon nowadays, so that Fr Ray’s comment – however depressing it may appear – may well have some substance in it. The Oratory, for instance, has at least one priest hearing confessions for a total of something like six hours on a Saturday; and yet in my experience although there is a fairly steady stream of penitents, it very rarely gets to be more than one priest can handle . . .

What’s that : perhaps 12-15 an hour ? Less than 100 in the whole day ? Even taking into account those who go directly to the House to ask for a particular priest; and those who make their confession on Sunday between Masses, I think it unlikely that the total number of confessions heard over the weekend exceeds 200 – which isn’t all that many when you look at the number of communicants.

It’s not, of course, my place to tell anyone how often they ought to go to confession : but I know how often I sin, and how much help confession is to me, and I find it hard to believe that most of us wouldn’t benefit from going to confession more often than we do.

Perhaps, as we turn our minds to the penance which our Bishops have suggested for the Fridays of May in reparation for the sins of sexual abuse which have been perpetrated in the Church, we might also turn out minds to putting right some of our own sins as well.

May is Mary’s Month; and I am certain that nothing would give our Blessed Mother more joy than to see each and every one of us make our confession at least once during her Month.

Will you do that for her . . ?

Whoops !

My apologies : for those I saw yesterday in Oxford, the appearance of a post this morning saying that I was in India must have come as something of a surprise !

I had been trying to be efficient - which is usually a mistake, for me at least. I was intended to be in India today, and - knowing how unreliable Internet access can be there - had scheduled a post for this morning a few days ago : and then my trip got postponed due to the air travel disruption, but I forgot to 'pull' the post.

So . . . sorry to anyone who was bewildered, and I shall write something from Delhi in due course - when I'm actually there !

I Don’t Understand . . .

‘. . . it may not be out of place to suggest that the priest’s devotion to the Mass should not be confined to the Mass which he personally celebrates. In our sermons we frequently stress the value of the people’s presence at the Holy Sacrifice. We remind them of their active share in the offering. We tell them that they should consider no act of self-denial too great which enables them to begin the day with morning Mass. What is true for the laity is true for the clergy. If the people are told of the value of the Mass at which they assist, we ourselves should be convinced of the value of assisting at the Masses celebrated by our fellow-priests.

Because we are priests it is easy for us to forget that for us no less than for our people attendance at Mass is a great opportunity of receiving grace. Yet often the priest will make his thanksgiving in the sacristy while Holy Mass is being celebrated in the Church . . . It seems strange that a priest will leave the church on completion of his thanksgiving, irrespective of the fact that before him another priest is offering the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. . . .

In many town parishes there is a mass at nine or ten o’clock in the morning for the benefit of those who through age or domestic duties are unable to attend an early Mass. We might ask how often we avail ourselves of the opportunity of being present at this Mass when it is not our turn to celebrate it ? . . . If our devotion to the Mass as such is deep, our appreciation of our own Mass will in turn grow deeper. At least we should be consistent. The ideal of frequent attendance at Mass which we put before our people we should first of all have practised ourselves.’

That passage is taken from ‘The People’s Priest’ by (at that time) Fr John Heenan – although by the time it actually appeared he was Bishop Heenan of Leeds : and I put it before my clerical readers as a spur to thought.

I have seen a priest serve another priest’s Mass : and this not out of necessity, but simply out of devotion – and I am sure that it was a telling example to all the faithful who were present : because there is little more telling than someone who practices what he preaches.

(The photo, by the way, is of a Mass at the Shrine of S. John Marie Vianney, the S. Curé d’Ars, who is, of course, the Patron of this ‘Year of the Priest’.)

Pray for us, S. George our Patron

Praise we now S. George our Patron,
Athlete in the heav’nly race;
Victor in the royal contest,
He beholds his Master’s face,
Palm and laurel crown receiving
In his own appointed place.

Long the conflict, fierce the torment,
For his Lord he gained renown,
Till the tyrant’s last devices
Mightier grace were forced to own,
Till at last the ancient dragon
See his power overthrown.

Trophy-bearer, now he beareth
Trophies to his Captain’s feet;
Soldier-martyr, now he leadeth
Heav’nly legions, as is meet,
And for us, still fighting, pleadeth
At Christ’s holy mercy-seat.

Pray for us, Saint George our Patron,
For thine England intercede,
Till from error purged, forgiven,
One in truth we chant our creed,
Till the Sacrifice she offers,
Catholic in word and deed.

Now to God the Father, glory;
Glolry be to God the Son,
Whom, triumphant in the contest,
In His Saint hath vict’ry won;
To the Holy Spirit glory,
While eternal ages run. Amen

Today is S. George’s Day; and a day not only for the English, but also for people of many other countries around the world to celebrate their Heavenly Patron : and I wish you all a very happy and blessed S. George’s Day.

In your prayers today, please remember England, and pray for the Conversion of England; but remember also all the other countries to look to St George as their Patron, and also all those who are locked in battle with demons within themselves . . . those who suffer from mental illnesses and disorders, addictions, disabling fears, and any other ‘personal demons’.

Pray, please, that S. George may be close to them, and give them some of his strength, his courage, and his determination, that they may overcome as he did, and be welcomed, in due course, with him into heaven.

(There is, incidentally, a very good post on S. George today on Godzdogz, written by fr Mark Davoren OP, which I would encourage you to go and read.)

I Don’t Understand . . .

Why all Catholic men don’t see serving Mass as the great privilege that it is, and learn to do it; and I also don’t see why all Catholic priests don’t actively encourage this . . .

It’s surprising how often, even somewhere like the Oratory, you find a Mass with no server : and I do sometimes wonder whether some priests don’t simply find it easier than having to create serving rotas, train servers, and all the other things which go with having servers for every Mass.

On the other hand, I suspect that most if not all of the practical problems could perfectly well be left in the hands of the laity – they certainly are in many if not most Anglican churches, without any apparent ill-effects.

The Mass ought to have servers; if only for the dignity of the greatest event known to man. I was involved in a discussion recently on another blog with someone who apparently despised Low Mass, and obviously was only really interested in High Mass; and whilst I disagree personally with that viewpoint, simply because I prefer the quiet and privacy of Low Mass, there is no doubt that High Mass is the ‘normative’ form of the Mass, and that ‘Low Mass’ is, in effect, a concession to make it possible for all priests to say Mass every day.

That said, though, I can see no reason why Mass should ever be said without a server unless there is simply no possibility of finding one : and it is hard to see why that should be the case in any normal circumstance – even during the working day it should always be possible – you have retired people, people who work shifts, students, all sorts of possible sources of servers.

Gentlemen : if you can’t serve, then why not learn, and make yourselves available ? And Fathers – why not make a conscious policy decision to try and eliminate server-less Masses from your Churches ?

(And, for the ladies, I have written this for the gentlemen because that is the perceived norm, particularly in the UK; but if you attend Mass somewhere where women and girls serve, and feel inclined to do so, then the above applies to you as well !)