Search this Topic:
Sep 25 16 4:44 AM
Still Point of the Turning WorldWhy Priests Should Face the People During MassRomano Guardini, an influential figure in the liturgical movement of the early twentieth century, was known for the gravitas he brought to the celebration of Mass. Heinz Kühn wrote of him:What drew me and the small congregation that came from all parts of Berlin to Guardini’s Mass...was simply this: He was a person who by his words and actions drew us into a world where the sacred became convincingly and literally tangible. His mere appearance radiated something for which I have no better word than luminous.... With him on the altar, the sacred table became the center of the universe.... The impact of the sacred action was all the more profound because Guardini celebrated the Mass versus populum — facing the people.I thought of this when I read Cardinal Robert Sarah’s July 5 plea to priests to abandon the practice of celebrating Mass facing the people, beginning on the first Sunday of Advent. Sarah, who is prefect of the Vatican’s Congregation for Divine Worship, expressed the view that the liturgy began to deteriorate when bishops implementing the reforms of Vatican II directed their priests to face the people. This has long been a talking point of the “Reform of the Reform” movement, but this time Sarah implied that Pope Francis shared his view, and it made headlines. We need to turn eastward (ad orientem) again, Sarah argued, “toward the Lord” who is coming in the Parousia, in order to combat our community-centered tendencies. Ad orientem is licit, so there is nothing stopping priests from doing it right away. Do it “wherever possible” he urged, “with a pastor’s confidence that this is something good for the church, something good for your people.”Pope Francis immediately reined in Sarah. He announced through his press secretary that there will be no new directives, and told Sarah to avoid using the term “Reform of the Reform.” Cardinal Vincent Nichols, in whose diocese the talk was given, also swiftly issued a statement reaffirming freestanding altars and Mass facing the people. Yet in the United States, despite the pope’s statement, a representative of the Bishops’ Committee on Divine Worship told Catholic News Service that future editions of the Missal would probably encourage ad orientem.I agree with Pope Francis and Cardinal Nichols. The Vatican II bishops established an admirable unity of practice in the reformed liturgy; breaking it up now, on such a central issue, would be the very opposite of “pastoral.” Leaving aside the fact that many churches, including St. Peter’s in Rome, are not oriented to the east (advocates of ad orientem get around this by saying that “liturgical east” can be any direction), there is also something deeply disturbing about the suggestion that celebrating Mass facing the people has weakened our bond with the Lord.Mass facing the people has a profound beauty. For the faithful to see the bread and wine, the shining vessels, the snow-white linen, the solemn gestures of touching, blessing, and lifting the elements—all this is an incomparable blessing. No matter how clunky the homily or how vexing the priest, when we come to the Eucharistic Prayer all is forgiven. The graceful, simple, and eloquent elements of our rites seen on the altar do indeed turn our hearts to the Lord. Pope Francis said it well in his encyclical, The Joy of the Gospel: “The church evangelizes and is herself evangelized by the beauty of the liturgy.” This beauty is revealed most convincingly not in sumptuous vestments or church décor, but in bread and wine, blessed, broken, and given. We need to see these things.A view of the priest’s back and elbows isn’t naturally or inevitably going to make anyone think about the Second Coming. I recently read a story about a Methodist lady, long before the council, who concluded from her one experience of Mass that the ceremony involved keeping a live crab from getting away from the center of the altar! The story is likely apocryphal, but the point is clear: if one can’t see what is happening, fantasy fills the gaps. A massive educational campaign would be needed to explain why the Lord is coming from the “east” (which, in your church, might be the west) and what this has to do with Eucharist. Meanwhile, celebrations facing the people communicate well without much explanation, which was exactly what the authors of the Vatican II reform intended.Kühn’s words about Guardini point out something else that merits reflection: “The sacred table became the center of the universe.” How right this is! The altar is the axis mundi. The fact that priest and people may now stand around the altar, rather than facing together toward some point outside the worship space, does not mean we are “without a common orientation.” The fathers of the council gave us an orientation when they placed bread and wine in the center of the gathered community. Christ is “the still point of the turning world,” to borrow a phrase from T. S. Eliot. “At the still point, there the dance is.”
What drew me and the small congregation that came from all parts of Berlin to Guardini’s Mass...was simply this: He was a person who by his words and actions drew us into a world where the sacred became convincingly and literally tangible. His mere appearance radiated something for which I have no better word than luminous.... With him on the altar, the sacred table became the center of the universe.... The impact of the sacred action was all the more profound because Guardini celebrated the Mass versus populum — facing the people.
Oct 6 16 5:06 AM
‘Liturgy shaming’ is a growing internet phenomenon. But is it a vice or a virtue?(RNS) William Bornhoft is a Catholic who admits that he sometimes cringes at the liturgical novelties he sees at Mass and has himself been tempted to post a complaint or a photo of the offending innovation.But Bornhoft, a 24-year-old writer from Minnesota, has also seen where that temptation can lead, and he didn’t think he was being especially outrageous when he penned an essay lamenting what he saw as a growing penchant for “liturgy shaming” – that is, furious believers using social media to denounce and target pastors or parishes that in the critics’ eyes have done something beyond the pale.The impetus for his column at the Catholic website Aleteia seemed to be a cut-and-dried example of a digital mob in action: A Seattle parish had posted a photo album on Facebook showing liturgical dance at Mass, including streamers and the sort of modern flourishes that make traditionalists see red.Sure enough, another Catholic site shared the album with the intent of making fun of the parish. But the online criticism quickly accelerated “to particularly nasty allegations of heresy and satanic worship,” as Bornhoft put it, plus personal attacks on the looks of the dancers.It got so bad that the parish deleted its Facebook page entirely, and it all prompted Bornhoft to do some soul-searching.“When we feel the urge to make a nasty comment or post a scandalous photo of liturgical abuse online, we should ask ourselves whether it’s love of the Church that is guiding our hearts, or a sense of entitled judgement,” Bornhoft wrote in his essay last February, appropriately enough during the penitential season of Lent.“I’m willing to bet that more often than not, hubris influences how we respond.”The reaction to his rebuke, however, only seemed to confirm the depth of the passions sparked by the issue and the potency of the new medium of the internet to fuel a debate about a problem that the web itself has helped create.“Are you seriously saddened that these scoundrels had to shut down their FB page?” said one of many critical commenters on his post. “If they don’t know that they’re doing wrong, we need to tell them so that they can repent,” said another. Wrote yet another commenter: “The time of inaction on the part of the laity is over and if the clergy will not correct themselves then it is up to us to force the issue.”In a telephone interview, Bornhoft stood by his critique but said he understood the sense of powerlessness that seemed to motivate many liturgy shamers:“There are a lot of liturgical issues today and they don’t trust that leadership can do anything. So they see liturgy shaming as an important and effective tool we didn’t have before.”Indeed, diehard traditionalists — who tend to be the main liturgy-shamers — say the stakes are too high and they don’t feel they have a choice.To be sure, online teasing is not the sole province of conservatives; those with more modern sensibilities often use the internet to make fun of traditionalists who wear especially elaborate regalia, for example. And Protestants can certainly throw shade at the music or architecture or worship styles of another congregation.But for many old-school Catholics, the liturgical innovations unleashed by the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s are to blame for every measurable decline and perceived ill in Catholicism since that time. (A very blinkered perspective, in my opinion.)Moreover, since the Mass is the center of Catholic worship and the Eucharist is the holy core of that celebration, anything that appears to diminish the sobriety or seriousness of the liturgy is tantamount to sacrilege and therefore merits strong action.That’s why, in his response to Bornhoft, Joseph Shaw, head of the Latin Mass Society, argued that those who use liturgy shaming are justified, much as those who denounced the sexual abuse of children by clergy were right to do whatever it took to stop the violation of the sacred – in one case children, in another the celebration of the Eucharist.Exhibit A for the analogy: One of the many Facebook groups dedicated to liturgical whistleblowing is called SLAP, or Survivors of Liturgical Abuse in Parishes, which echoes the name of the leading clergy abuse victims organization, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, or SNAP.Above all, Shaw said, liturgy shaming works by pressuring church authorities to take action so the perpetrators “will never again gloat over their implied heresy or their liturgical abuses.”These viral campaigns can on occasion have the intended effect, as they did for the Seattle parish Bornhoft wrote about.Just last Christmas, for example, a priest in the Philippines was suspended from ministry and forced to apologize after a parishioner’s cellphone video of him on a hoverboard at the end of midnight Mass went viral.Yet in reality most online campaigns go nowhere and chiefly seem to serve as fodder to bolster traditionalist views that contemporary Catholicism is the Church of Anything Goes.Hence the many posts about episodes real or legendary: “clown masses” in which the celebrant dresses as a clown, for instance, or a Eucharistic procession in Austria that used a huge focaccia held up with a giant pair of tongs.Or the photos of the archbishop of Palermo riding a bicycle around his cathedral in April in full vestments before a Mass in honor of athletes. Liturgy shamers were outraged at that one and blamed Pope Francis – who is not a favorite of theirs – for appointing such a disrespectful churchman. The archdiocese didn’t seem to mind and posted the photos on its website.There are certainly any number of liturgical innovations that can sometimes raise the eyebrows of even open-minded Massgoers – particularly goofy vestments, perhaps, or the burial urn shaped like the iconic Italian coffee pot that sat in front of the altar during the funeral Mass for the scion of the Bialetti coffeemaker clan.But complaints can also be exaggerated or – no surprise, it’s the internet – based on misinformation.Back in 2002, when he was the newly appointed archbishop in Milwaukee, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, now in New York, briefly donned a big foam “cheesehead” hat favored by Green Bay Packers fans at the start of his homily. He did it just for a moment because it was opening day for the Packers, and the good-natured Dolan wanted to show he was also a fan of his flock’s hometown favorites.But the image took on a life of its own on the web and Dolan was excoriated by traditionalist critics for celebrating the Eucharist with the garish hat – which he did not do – during what came to be known as the “Cheesehead Mass.”That sort of urban legend is a perfect example of what cultural anthropologists call the “context collapse” that has been hastened by the instantaneous information overload created by the World Wide Web, said Daniella Zsupan-Jerome, a professor of pastoral theology at Notre Dame Seminary Graduate School of Theology in New Orleans.“Because of how information is so easily shared we come across just the ‘byte’ without the proper context that allows us to interpret what it’s really about,” said Zsupan-Jerome, who has a master’s degree in liturgy and writes on the church and digital culture.“It’s just him with a cheesehead. This context collapse often leads us to erroneous conclusions or conflict.”Added to that are the other usual suspects in internet addiction: the thrill of being part of the conversation and the chemical buzz of getting a response “whether it’s a thumbs up or getting a comment back that shows someone cares, for better or worse. It’s all gratifying, it gives us a sense of meaning,” Zsupan-Jerome said.But it’s especially problematic because the context is the church – a community built on doing unto others as you would have them do unto you.To be sure, complaints about liturgy are not new. Zsupan-Jerome noted that liturgy is not just sacred; it’s also something Christians relate to at a gut level as much as on an intellectual plane. So there will always be sharp and visceral disagreements.The difference is that now those disagreements can go viral, and the tendency is to do what viruses encourage, which is to gang up on the target.“That’s where the shame is,” she said. “The shame is not in whatever liturgical dancer was in this video. The shame is in the fact that we as Christians, we Catholics, communicate with each other in ways that are ugly and vitriolic.” (And it happens not only for matters liturgical - the vehement, vitriolic and vituperative efforts of the fans of a certain celebrity papal secretary to "silence" any criticism of their idol comes to mind.)“If our witness to the world is ugliness and shame and vitriol and ridicule and mockery, then that brings shame on our efforts to be authentic evangelizers.”So what can be done?Bornhoft said that while he understands the frustration of liturgy shamers, Catholic moral thinking insists that the ends do not justify the means. When legitimate online theological debates lapse into bullying, he said, it’s sinful – which is something faithful Catholics above all should recognize.“If we can’t all agree that this is wrong then it’s not going to go away,” he said. “So first we have to agree it’s wrong and can be immoral.”
Oct 7 16 1:09 AM
Cardinal Robert Sarah has said the “hateful divisions” over liturgy must end, and that liturgical debates have become an occasion for “public humiliation”. (That's rich coming from him - he stokes the flames!)In an interview with the French publication Le Nef, translated by Catholic World Report, the cardinal, who heads the Vatican’s liturgy department, reportedly said: “Without a contemplative spirit, the liturgy will remain an occasion for hateful divisions and ideological clashes, for the public humiliation of the weak by those who claim to hold some authority, whereas it ought to be the place of our unity and our communion in the Lord. Why should we confront and detest each other?” ( He should go preach that to his obsessed trad foillowers)The cardinal also said fierce debates over the liturgy are the work of the devil: (Another plum for his followers t swallow - except they would never think it applies to them)“Yes, the devil wants us to be opposed to each other at the very heart of the sacrament of unity and fraternal communion. It is time for this mistrust, contempt and suspicion to cease.”He said he specifically regrets that ad orientem worship has been contested in an “ideological clash of factions”.In July, the cardinal gave a speech in which he asked priests to begin celebrating Mass ad orientem – that is, facing east. It provoked a debate, in which the Vatican appeared to reject Cardinal Sarah’s remarks.In the same week, Cardinal Sarah had a private audience with Pope Francis. In this latest interview, the cardinal said he has explained to the Pope that he wanted to help the faithful, not to spark conflict. (Naive to say the least) “As I had the opportunity to say recently, during a private interview with the Holy Father, here I am just making the heartfelt suggestions of a pastor who is concerned about the good of the faithful. I do not intend to set one practice against another.”In August, referring to the controversy over his speech, Cardinal Sarahsaid that the reaction to it was “not always very accurate”.In the new interview, the cardinal said that ad orientem could not be “imposed as a revolution”; it was sensible, he added, to prepare a parish with catechesis first.He went on to say that “If it is physically not possible to celebrate ad orientem, it is absolutely necessary to put a cross on the altar in plain view, as a point of reference for everyone. Christ on the cross is the Christian East.”The cardinal was speaking on the publication of his new book The Strength of Silence: Against the Dictatorship of Noise. The book meditates on the encounter with God. In the interview, Cardinal Sarah describes prayer as “a moment of silent, intimate encounter in which a human being stands face to face with God to adore Him and to express his filial love for Him”.In response to a question about his ad orientem appeal, the cardinal said this encounter can be seen in St Mary Magdalene, who “was able to recognize Jesus on Easter morning because she turned back toward Him”.He goes on to link this disposition with ad orientem worship: “How can we enter into this interior disposition except by turning physically, all together, priest and faithful, toward the Lord who comes, toward the East symbolized by the apse where the cross is enthroned?”Cardinal Sarah said this “outward orientation leads us to the interior orientation that it symbolises.” He argues that it dates back to apostolic times, and that it is “not a matter of celebrating with one’s back to the people or facing them, but toward the East, ad Dominum, toward the Lord.”The cardinal added that ad orientem worship helps the priest avoid the temptation “to monopolise the conversation”. If the priest is “facing the Lord”, the cardinal said, he is less likely to “become a professor who gives a lecture during the whole Mass, reducing the altar to a podium centered no longer on the cross but on the microphone!”He added: “The priest must remember that he is only an instrument in Christ’s hands, that he must be quiet in order to make room for the Word, and that our human words are ridiculous compared to the one Eternal Word.”The cardinal said he is “convinced” that priests use a different, more reverent tone of voice when they celebrate Mass ad orientem. ( (Yes they mumble)
Oct 8 16 6:23 AM
Starving in the PewsGive or take, I’ve heard about two thousand sermons. Most are boring, many are dreadful, and some are spiritually harmful. Bad preaching starves the church.I was raised in a mix of Catholic and Evangelical churches. When I turned 16 and got my license, my parents let me choose. They meant choose between their two churches, but instead I chose to explore the rest of the churches of Denver. (In hindsight I was destined to become a religion professor.) Around south Denver, I heard sermons from Baptists, Methodists, Episcopalians, Mormons, Unitarians, and not a few megachurches. Later I explored further north and heard Ethiopian Orthodox, Black Catholics, Latino Catholics, and the Denver Rescue Mission.A few years later, I was a fieldwork researcher for a sociology of religion project in Indianapolis, where I focused on Pentecostal churches. I went on to study Hebrew, Aramaic, Greek, Latin, and a few other languages. I’ve studied rhetoric and homiletics, ancient and modern. I talk in front of people for a living. I have decent diction.So much for my bona fides. But as a Catholic layperson, I’ve never preached one sermon, and I probably never will. I guess I’m an expert sermon critic.From the pew, here’s what I want to yell at every preacher in the pulpit: You have no idea of the spiritual hunger out here. Almost every sermon is a missed opportunity.When you look out at your congregation, no matter how small, if there is anyone between the ages of 18 and 55 out there, you need to imagine what they did to get to that pew that day. They fought the pressures of their work schedule, which for most of them is out of their control. They pushed back against the busyness of their children’s schedules. Perhaps they told their son or daughter that they’d need to be late to the soccer game because of church at 11:00, and that caused a fight not yet resolved. Perhaps their family had an argument that very morning about whether to go to church at all or make the drive to visit grandma instead.And this is just a normal week, not to mention the ones where a job was lost, a friend imperiled, a roof leaked, a spouse hit bottom, a child pulled away, a parent fell ill, an injustice unrectified, a mortgage past due, a dream crushed, a business shuttered. This is not to mention the solitary soul that for indiscernible reasons just decided that day, after many years, to walk back through those doors and slip into the back pew. A still, small voice calling, a spirit welling up to new life within, waiting, hanging on every word from the pulpit, aching for a breath.Then, moments later, strangled. The spirit quenched, the soul starved. The pew empty, the door shut.For those who stay put, the mind wanders within minutes. Should have stayed home and worked on the roof. Could have avoided that fight with my son about soccer. Would have rather taken the day trip to visit those relatives. What will I eat for lunch.Within minutes, you’ve lost us. But don’t just take my word for it. A recent study from the Pew Research Center demonstrates that the quality of sermons is the single most important factor in attracting people to church.When they search for a new house of worship, a new Pew Research Center study shows, Americans look first and foremost for a place where they like the preaching and the tone set by the congregation’s leaders. Fully 83% of Americans who have looked for a new place of worship say the quality of preaching played an important role in their choice of congregation.The good news about preaching the good news is that you don’t have to be a brilliant scholar or captivating orator to do it. The raw materials of the Bible and Christian history offer plenty to work with.First, do no harm from the pulpit. Don’t ask for money. Don’t trivialize the moment by doing church announcements. Don’t ever be misogynistic. In fact, never demean anyone from the pulpit.Choose one reading to bring to life. As the long-time professor of homiletics at Yale Divinity School, David Bartlett, once said, “A select few of the great sermons I’ve heard in my life were about multiple readings, but all of the worst sermons were.” If one of the day’s readings tells a story, you’re better off choosing that one. That’s what we remember best from the readings we just heard.Stick to the basics. God loves us. Strive for justice. Ask for mercy, and grant it. Follow saintly examples. Tell a story or two. Activate our spiritual imaginations for those few minutes of the week.Humor is high risk, not only because you’re not funny, but also because you misread the mood of the congregation. Remember, we don’t do this church stuff all week like you and don’t need a humorous break from the numinous. We are spiritually hungry, and we can get comedy anytime we want.We’re not here to laugh, but to be challenged and comforted. Every sermon of every week should aspire to do both. Show forth the paradox of demandingness: churches which challenge their congregations with concrete, difficult demands of virtue, love, justice, and mercy are paradoxically more likely to retain their members and attract new ones. And then show how God comforts the fallen and afflicted -- in other words, those holy souls in front of you.Pastors, you claim to love Jesus. He commanded you to “feed his sheep.” But week in and week out, we’re starving.
When they search for a new house of worship, a new Pew Research Center study shows, Americans look first and foremost for a place where they like the preaching and the tone set by the congregation’s leaders. Fully 83% of Americans who have looked for a new place of worship say the quality of preaching played an important role in their choice of congregation.
Oct 18 16 6:23 AM
Liturgical (Reform of the) Reform and “Neighborhood People”Today’s Washington Post has an interesting piece by E. J. Dionne on what lessons progressives might learn from the rise of Donald Trump. In the course of his discussion he invokes, as a contrast to the sort of cosmopolitanism found among most progressives, Andrew Greeley’s notion of “neighborhood people,” noting:Being “citizens of the world” is not high on their priority list. They love the particular patch where they were raised or that they have adopted as their own.Putting presidential politics aside (something of ever-increasing difficulty and desirability these days), I was struck by the applicability of Greeley’s notion of “neighborhood people” to questions of liturgical reform. The liturgical version of neighborhood people are those who love the liturgy they grew up with and are attached to it not for the richness of its theology or the beauty of its words or music or vestments or architecture, but simply because it is theirs, and has been theirs through moments of great sorrow and moments of great joy, marking milestones in their lives and recalling for them the presence of God at those milestones.Many of the liturgical reformers of the post-conciliar period were not particularly attentive to these liturgical neighborhood people. Tending to be cosmopolitans themselves, the reformers seemed not to understand how a tacky shrine or some badly warbled chant from the Requiem Mass or saccharine devotions to Our Lady of Wherever could actually be central to the religious life of the neighborhood people. The anthropologists Mary Douglas and Victor Turner were voices crying in the wilderness in the post-conciliar period, warning against the vandalism being carried out by the cosmopolitan reformers against the religious sensibilities of the neighborhood people.I do not think, however, that what the liturgical neighborhood people of today want or need is for someone to come along an put things back “the way it was.” First, because such a thing is not really possible; unless the liturgy is thought of as a zone hermetically sealed off from the rest of life, we cannot recreated the liturgical experience of the immigrant Church of the first half of the twentieth century. But, second, the neighborhood people have moved on. Some, alas, have moved on out of the Church. But others have adapted, willy-nilly, and have made themselves a home in the reformed liturgy, and love it as “the particular patch where they were raised” spiritually.In an odd twist—the sort that history so often provides—it is now those who would replace Eagles Wings or Amazing Grace with the chants of the traditional Requiem who are the cosmopolitans that seem unaware of or unconcerned with how deeply these songs have sunk their roots into the lives of the liturgical neighborhood people. The neighborhood people are offended when Mrs. Murphy, who has served as a “Eucharistic Minister” (as they ignorantly call the Extraordinary Minister of Holy Communion) for thirty years and brought communion to Pop when he was in the nursing home, is told by the new pastor that her services are no longer needed because now only he and the deacon will be distributing Holy Communion at Mass, because this is more traditional. They feel shunned when the new young priest, fresh from the seminary, turns his back on them during Mass to pray the Eucharistic prayer, not only making them feel cut off from what is going on, but also blocking their view of the consecrated elements. They don’t care if this is the recovery of a very ancient practice; it is not a practice that they have ever experienced.Some might say that once these changes are explained—once the neighborhood people are educated as to their meaning—then they will accept them. Perhaps. But that is what cosmopolitans always say about neighborhood people (it’s what they said during the reforms in the 60s). Dionne points out that many people offer retraining and re-education as the answer for those who have been left behind by the globalized economy. But those who have been steel workers or miners for 40 years might be understandably resistant to being told that they must now forget all that and learn to sit at a terminal all day. Those who cannot understand this resistance are likely those who have little understanding of what it means to be rooted in a place, in a community within which one has lived one’s whole life. Likewise, liturgical reformers (or reform-of-the-reformers) who think that they can educate people into “better” liturgy perhaps have an insufficient understanding of how liturgy seeps into the bones of neighborhood people. Citizens of the world who are unmoored from a particular place, they are likely to offer abstractions learned from books, whether these abstractions be “active participation” or “organic development.”Of course, I too am a cosmopolitan, not a neighborhood person. I wince at tacky devotional art and at much (but not all) post-conciliar liturgical music. And even when I enjoy something like a Marian shrine decorated with blinking Christmas lights or a rousing chorus of Eagles Wings it is always with at least a soupçon of postmodern irony. And I am not saying that there should not have been a post-conciliar reform, or that some things that were thrown out in that reform might not be worth trying to recover. But just as, while recognizing the reality of global economic change, we cannot ignore the neighborhood people being left behind by the global economy, so too, when advocating for liturgical change, we should not ignore those who do not really care about what is “liturgically correct” but who simply want to be able to pray the liturgy that has been their home for their whole lives. These neighborhood people embody a genuine wisdom that any advocate for reform should respect.
Being “citizens of the world” is not high on their priority list. They love the particular patch where they were raised or that they have adopted as their own.
... my impression, both from the few [Extraordinary Form] EF Masses I have attended and from my interactions with EF proponents on the interwebs (thus, perhaps, a mistaken impression), is that most of those who are attached to the EF or to ad orientem or Gregorian chant are not the “neighborhood people” that Greeley and Dionne refer to. That is, they are not those who grew up with this “more traditional form of worship” and are attached to is because it has been woven into the fabric of their lives, but rather are those who have discovered it from reading Fr. Z or the NLM or some other such outlet. This is not to say that their attachment is not sincere, but it is the kind of attachment more characteristic of cosmopolitans than of neighborhood people.
Oct 25 16 3:02 AM
When a choir director and parish priest differ over liturgical music, the choir should follow in good faith the wishes of the priest for the sake of unity, said the papal liturgist.When it comes to celebrating the liturgy, "we should never fight," Msgr. Guido Marini told choir members, directors and priests. "Otherwise, we distort the very nature" of what the people of God should be doing during the Mass, which is seeking to be "one body before the Lord."The papal master of liturgical ceremonies spoke Oct. 21 at a conference opening a three-day jubilee for choirs. Hundreds of people involved in providing music for the liturgical celebrations in Italian dioceses and parishes -- such as singers, organists and musicians -- attended, as did directors of diocesan liturgy offices and schools of sacred music.During a brief question-and-answer period after his talk on the role of the choir, a participant asked Msgr. Marini what she termed "an uncomfortable, practical question.""Many times, in our parishes, the priest wants the choir to perform songs that are inappropriate, both because of the text" and because of the moment the song is to be performed during the service, she said."In these situations, must the choir master follow the wishes of the priest even with the knowledge that by doing so, the choir is no longer serving the liturgy, but the priest?" she said to applause.Asked for his advice, Msgr. Marini smiled, cast his eyes upward and rubbed his chin signaling his awareness that it was a hot-button topic. He said he felt "sandwiched" "between two fires, between priests and choirs."Acknowledging the difficulty of such a situation, he said he sided with the priest.There are situations where priests may not be giving completely correct guidance, he said, and there are directors that could be doing better. But in either case, conflict and division should be avoided and "humility and communion be truly safeguarded," he said.This, like with all disagreements, he said, requires that all sides be very patient with each other, sit down and talk, and explain the reasons behind their positions.But if no conclusion or final point is reached, then "perhaps it is better also to come out of it momentarily defeated and wait for a better time rather than generate divisions and conflict that do no good," he said to applause.Live the path of communion and unity in the parish "with lots of goodness, cordiality and sometimes the ability to sacrifice something of oneself, too," Msgr. Marini advised.Just like the grain of wheat, he said, "sometimes all of us must die in something" knowing that it will bear future fruit.Msgr. Marini responded to the question after delivering a 50-minute speech, in which he received a standing ovation.Titled, "The Role of the Choir in Liturgical Celebrations," the monsignor outlined five fundamental elements of the liturgy and how choirs should help serve each of those aspects.The liturgy is the work of Christ and it should express the Savior's living presence, he said. Choir members, therefore, must be people who have Christ present in their hearts.While much care must be given to the artistic and technical aspects of liturgical music's performance, the hearts of those who perform must be cared for as well so that they are men and women of faith who feel "a burning love for Christ" and find their life's meaning in him, he said.The liturgy also must evoke the church's universality, where there is a harmonious union of diversity and continuity between tradition and newness, he said. This means that the choir must never be "front and center" or seem separate from the faithful because they are part of the assembly.Pope Francis has insisted that liturgical music for papal liturgies "never go beyond the rite" and force celebrants and the assembly to wait for the singing to finish before proceeding on to the next moment of the Mass, he said. "Song integrates itself into the rite," serving the ceremony and not itself.He also asked that choirs help the liturgy in its purpose of gathering everyone together to conform themselves more closely to God and his will.The Mass is about overcoming individual distinctions so that "it is no longer I who live but Christ who lives in me," he said. That means the choir should help everyone in the assembly be an active participant during the moments of song including by stirring people's emotional or spiritual feelings.Choirs must help the liturgy by inviting all of creation to lift its gaze toward God on high, he said. People should feel elevated and pulled out of the mundanity of the ordinary and everyday -- not to escape from it, but so as to return renewed to one's everyday life after Mass.If song is not "a bridge over eternity" then it is not doing its job, he said. Song must not be worldly and unworthy, but must in some way be the "song of angels."Lastly, he said, choirs must be missionary like the church and the liturgy by way of attraction, which it does by revealing God's beauty, wonder and infinite mercy.
Oct 28 16 7:37 AM
In a move considered to be an an attempt to rein in the Cardinal Sarah Pope Francis today appointed a raft of new members to Cardinal Robert Sarah’s liturgy department, choosing a series of pastoral moderates to replace more conservative-minded figures.The move will be read as the Pope’s attempt to rein in the cardinal who has consistently called for priests to celebrate Mass facing East, something the Pope reprimanded him for earlier this year.Among the new members of the department – formally known as the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments – are Piero Marini, a long-serving master of papal ceremonies and a key proponent of the liturgical reforms of the Second Vatican Council.Others named as members, who will effectively oversee Cardinal Sarah’s work and vote on decisions, include Cardinal Pietro Parolin (Vatican Secretary of State) and New Zealand Cardinal John Dew.Cardinal Sarah, from Guinea, has consistently called for priests to turn their backs on the congregation while celebrating Mass and has struck a very different tone to the Pope’s merciful approach to families in difficult circumstances. Francis this week spoke at the St John Paul II Institute for Studies on Marriage and Family in place of the cardinal, where he stressed the importance of priests accompanying families struggling to live up to the Church’s teaching on family life.The complete list of department members is as follows: Rainer Maria WoelkiJohn Olorunfemi OnaiyekanPietro ParolinGérald Cyprien LacroixPhilippe Nakellentuba OuédraogoJohn Atcherley DewRicardo Blázquez PérezArlindo Gomes FurtadoGianfranco RavasiBeniamino StellaDominic JalaDomenico SorrentinoDenis James HartPiero MariniBernard-Nicolas AubertinRomulo G. VallesLorenzo Voltolini EstiArthur Joseph SerratelliClaudio ManiagoBernt Ivar EidsvigMiguel Ángel D'AnnibaleJosé Manuel Garcia CordeiroCharles MorerodJean-Pierre Kwambamba MasiBenny Mario TravasJohn Bosco Chang Shin-Ho
Nov 9 16 7:48 AM
Liturgy Lines: “Including People with Disability in Liturgy”I grew up in an era when the so-called ‘handicapped’ were seldom seen and certainly never heard. They were looked upon as objects of pity and recipients of charity rather than as truly human. Thank goodness things have changed and today people with disability are generally recognised as having the same rights and entitlements as everyone else and as being valuable members of society.The outcome given highest priority at Synod 2003 was “That parish liturgy become more vibrant, meaningful and inclusive”. One of the proposed actions for achieving this outcome is for parishes to ensure that their liturgy is inclusive and welcoming of people with disability. How well are we as parish communities and as individuals doing in this area?The most obvious place to start, and in many ways the easiest to deal with, is the provision of access for those who use walking aids and wheelchairs. While many church carparks now have designated bays for people with physical disability, they are not always wide enough to allow easy access or located conveniently.While an effort has been made in many places to provide an entrance for wheelchairs, ramps that lead to rarely used doors continue to convey the message of marginalisation. If at all possible, people with handicap should be able to enter the main door of the church along with everyone else.Once inside, wheelchair users need a place in the church which does not block the aisle and where they do not feel that they are in the way. Consideration also needs to be given to their access to the communion line and to toilet facilities.Those with physical disability have a right to contribute their gifts in the area of liturgical ministry. Some years ago, one of the best readers in my own parish was a young lady with cerebral palsy who could not stand at the lectern. A desk and mike were set up beside the ambo so that she could sit to read.The repetitive and predictable nature of liturgy means that it is more accessible to people with intellectual disability than many other areas of life. What effect does it have then when the people’s responses are continually changed, or when the assembly is expected to follow printed words in a detailed order of service? Are we confining participation in liturgy to those with good facility with written language?Parishes also need to consider questions such as: Is there a loop system in place for those who have difficulty hearing? Do we need a sign language interpreter? Are there clearly marked steps and handrails for the sight impaired? Is the printing on the parish bulletin large enough for everyone to read? Are communion arrangements for coeliacs well publicised?The best way to address issues of inclusivity is to employ an inclusive strategy. Talk with people with disability about their needs, involve them in assessing the current situation and planning for change, tap into their wisdom.As individuals, we need to ask ourselves how welcoming we are of fellow members of the body of Christ with levels of physical and mental ability different from our own.
Nov 10 16 4:56 AM
Is Cardinal Robert Sarah slowly being silenced? An indication of such a development surfaced with the cardinal’s withdrawal from participating in a congress in Germany.After the recent overhaul of the Vatican liturgy office, which Cardinal Sarah heads, he is now backing out of public appearances.In a press release by the Kölner international Liturgische Tagung (International Liturgical Conference of Cologne), Father Guido Rodheudt, conference organizer, explained that Cardinal Sarah “regrettably had to cancel his participation in the 18th Liturgical conference” in 2017.This news came as a surprise since the Cardinal had three times confirmed his participation, including in writing, since November 2015, said Rodheudt. Cardinal Sarah cancelled not only his participation in-person, but will also not submit his written paper to be read by a representative — a practice common for cardinals in cases of emergency absence.In an interview with the German news agency kath.net, Fr. Rodheudt explained: “Cardinal Sarah has told us that for the coming year a number of obligations came up, which force him to cancel his participation even after repeated confirmation.”“The meaning of the Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum for the Renewal of the Liturgy in the Latin Church” was to be his topic, said Rodheudt.Fr. Rodheudt interprets the recent overhaul of Sarah’s congregation and the cancellation of his upcoming public appearances as a direct result of Sarah’s attempt to reform the liturgical praxis and the post-conciliar abuses that have pervaded the liturgical praxis of countless parishes all over the world.“With his summation in London, Cardinal Sarah has revealed cracks and breaks of the liturgy. The liturgical praxis after the council has widespread lost the sense for the sacred and the worship of the invisibly present God more and more. […] That is why he has met resistance.”At the same time, Rodheudt is skeptical about the direct involvement of Pope Francis: “We are not aware of an instruction by the Holy Father to Cardinal Sarah to cancel his participation. What can be said is that Pope Francis does not seem to have a special interest in liturgical questions.”While Cardinal Sarah seems to have perfectly continued the Benedictine idea of the “reform of the reform” of the liturgy, “it does not seem that Pope Francis sees much value in putting these kinds of questions into a public discussion. That is why he has asked Cardinal Sarah not to follow up on this thought [of the “reform of the reform”] in his function as prefect for the Congregation for Liturgy and also not to use the term “reform of the reform” anymore.Francis has, therefore, officially stigmatized a “theological concept” of his predecessor. “One could get the idea that the reform of the reform is not really wanted.”The letter Sarah wrote to the organizers of the congress closed with the words: “I regret that I must cancel my participation on March 31 as well as the homily during Mass the following day in the abbey Church of Rolduc. I wish nevertheless that this spectacular liturgical congress might be a success and I ensure you and the participants of my prayers that will accompany you in your endeavor in these so important topics.”Archbishop Alexander Sample of Portland will participate in the liturgical conference. At this point in time, the organizers seek to replace Cardinal Sarah with another high-ranking Church official.
Nov 10 16 5:38 PM
Asked about the liturgy, Pope Francis insisted the Mass reformed after the Second Vatican Council is here to stay and “to speak of a ‘reform of the reform’ is an error.”In authorizing regular use of the older Mass, now referred to as the “extraordinary form,” now-retired Pope Benedict XVI was “magnanimous” toward those attached to the old liturgy, he said. “But it is an exception.”Pope Francis told Father Spadaro he wonders why some young people, who were not raised with the old Latin Mass, nevertheless prefer it.“And I ask myself: Why so much rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something, insecurity or even something else. Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid.”
Nov 11 16 3:55 AM
Nov 11 16 6:42 AM
Francis warns of ‘rigid’ liturgy, confesses soft spot for old ladiesIn an interview at the start of a newly published collection of his homilies while archbishop of Buenos Aires, Pope Francis has warned of rigidity in those seeking to roll back liturgical reform. He also shares thoughts on preaching, politics and Pentecostals -- and his soft spot for ladies of a certain age. ROME - Proving once again that he can double as the world’s parish priest and the successor of Peter, Pope Francis has given a wide-ranging interview where he acknowledges he has a soft spot for old ladies while rejecting the conservative theological idea of a liturgical “reform of the reform.”Referring to what’s known as the “extraordinary form” for celebrating the Mass - in which priest and congregation face the tabernacle, as they did before the Second Vatican Council, Francis said his predecessor Benedict XVI was “magnanimous” in making the “fair gesture” of bringing it back.That decision, the pope said, was an attempt to address “a certain mentality of some groups and people who had nostalgia and were walking away.” Yet, he insisted, celebrating the Mass this way is an exception, “it is for this reason that we speak of the ‘extraordinary’ form.”“We have to meet with magnanimity those who are tied to a certain way of prayer,” Francis said. “But the Second Vatican Council and Sacrosantum Concilium should carry on as they are. To talk about a ‘reform of the reform’ is a mistake.”Sacrosantum Concilium, or the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, was the first document of the Second Vatican Council. It allowed for Mass to be celebrated in the vernacular language, and introduced a series of changes to allow for a greater participation of the congregation in the celebration of the Eucharist.The “reform of the reform” refers to the attempt in some conservative quarters to abolish many of the liturgical changes implemented after the Council, claiming they were wrong or have been misinterpreted and taken too far.The Argentine pope was talking to his Jesuit friend Father Antonio Spadaro at the opening of a book collecting more than 200 homilies and addresses by Jorge Mario Bergoglio, then cardinal archbishop of Buenos Aires, between 1999 and 2013. In Your Eyes is my Word is currently only available in Italian.Spadaro had asked the pope to write an introduction, but said Francis preferred to have a conversation instead. As a result, the first fifteen pages of the book, which is over 1,000 pages long, are taken up with their exchange on July 9.The priest, who is director of the semi-official Jesuit journal Civiltà Cattolica, asked the pope if he saw dangers in some of those calling for a “reform of the reform.”Francis answers: “I ask myself about this. For example, I always try to understand what’s behind the people who are too young to have lived the pre-conciliar liturgy but who want it. Sometimes I’ve found myself in front of people who are too strict, who have a rigid attitude. And I wonder: How come such a rigidity? Dig, dig, this rigidity always hides something: insecurity, sometimes even more … Rigidity is defensive. True love is not rigid.”Francis also talks to Spadaro about experiences he has had in the confessional and in meeting people. The closer a priest is to the people, he says, the better preacher he becomes, because he is able to relate the Gospel directly to the problems in people’s lives.“The farther away you are from the people and people’s problems, the more you take refuge in a theology framed by ‘should and shouldn’t,’ that doesn’t communicate anything, is empty, abstract, lost in nothingness.”“Sometimes, we answer with our own words questions no one is asking,” he warns.The pope also talks about ecumenism, underlying the importance of the dialogue with Pentecostals, noting he had a very close relationship with several leaders of that movement in Buenos Aires. He also warns, however, of the risk of falling in with a “theology of prosperity.”Talking specifically about his home country Argentina, Francis acknowledges that late President Néstor Kirchner “really couldn’t stand me. The exchanges were very tense.”The animosity the president felt towards the leader of the Argentine Church has been well documented, with Kirchner once referring to the cardinal as the “spiritual leader of the opposition.”Francis also notes that, although it should never be partisan, a homily is always “political” because it’s delivered amidst the people. “Everything we do has a political dimension and concerns the construction of civilization.”One can’t say, he continues, that Christians are a-political because as citizens they’re called to work together towards the common good.“We must find new forms of dialogue and cohabitation in our pluralistic societies,” he says. “We need new ties, a new conscience of solidarity that goes beyond any religious, ideological or political frontier.”In a more anecdotal tone, Francis says that when writing a homily, a priest must be creative, otherwise, he’s “sterile.” Reading books that go beyond theology, for instance can be of great help. The pope in particular notes how he has been inspired by Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s classic novel The Brothers Karamazov.He also talks about his need to connect with people, about missing the freedom he used to have to improvise his homilies, and acknowledges having once used fireworks in a liturgy to talk to children about the devil and about the popemobile rides.“Sometimes I feel the desire to get off the popemobile. Often it happens in front of the old ladies. I have a weakness for old ladies … especially those who are funny,” Francis said.
Nov 12 16 8:28 AM
Martin Klöckener in Interview: Was Missal Translation an Issue in the Naming of the 27 New CDW Members?What is the significance of the 27 new members?Klöckener: That depends on how the Congregation for Divine Worship [CDW] in Rome collaborates with the new members. If the CDW calls upon them regularly, then they must go to Rome once or twice a year for sessions of the Congregation. Then their voice can be heard, including in the operational work of the Congregation, when it is a matter of determining projects, topics, and goals. These contacts make better dialogue possible between the Vatican and the churches in the dioceses worldwide. After all, the recently-named bishops and cardinals come from the most widely varying continents and countries.Is there such dialogue now?Klöckener: For the last 15 years the Congregation has involved its outside members very rarely in its procedures and decisions.How many members in all does the Congregation now have?Klöckener: This was not communicated. It depends upon whether the previous members retain their appointments or their terms have expired.Do the new appointments change the direction of the Congregation?Klöckener: That is difficult to say at this point. The appointment of Archbishop Piero Marini, a notable expert in liturgy who has always advocated decisively for the aspirations of the Second Vatican Council, is significant. Gianfranco Ravasi is interesting because he has done much in the realm of culture as president of the Pontifical Council for Culture. There are certainly also new members who have no particular scholarly competence in the area of liturgy. That Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin is among the new members could be a sign that the CDW is supposed to collaborate more strongly with the new members.What do you mean?Klöckener: Parolin represents the opening that Pope Francis also wants. However, he has not yet made any clear direction apparent in the realm of liturgy. It appears that it doesn’t particularly interest him.How is that?Klöckener: The recent decrees of the CDW on foot-washing or elevation of the feast of Mary Magdalen are – from purely liturgical perspective – not very important. The latter certainly has a strongly symbolic character with respect to esteem for women in the church. To designate Mary Magdalen as “Apostle of the Apostles” is a programmatic step forward. Pope Francis wanted it to be so.Also in the foot-washing it means that not only men can participate…Klöckener: Yes, it’s a new determination of who may participate. But the pope himself has not held to this decree, insofar as he has washed the feet of non-Christians. He has thereby give[n] a sign on where he actually wants things to go: in the direction of a more open church that looks first at people themselves, especially the poor and disadvantaged. There has been opposition to this within the curia and in other quarters. And presumably there are also certain tensions between the fundamental orientation of the pope and the views of Cardinal Robert Sarah, prefect of the CDW. (Oh, that's an understatement!)The foot-washing decree is seen as the clear wish of Pope Francis. So what can the CDW members contribute?Klöckener: Normally the pope does not intrude in the daily work of the CDW. A congregation has various tasks to carry out, including much ecclesiastical administrative work. In recent years there have been very few important initiatives from the CDW. The situation of the church is also different than previously; many new questions have arisen for which conventional ways of thinking and acting do not always suffice to resolve them.How was it previously?Klöckener: The CDW operated differently in the first 20 years of its existence. Up until the 1980s its primary task was the immediate implementation of the constitution on the liturgy and carrying out the liturgy reform. Especially in the first decade after the close of the Council, the CDW cultivated very intense contact with the bishops’ conferences. This contact has greatly receded today.Is that a criticism from you?Klöckener: Yes. The CDW, as central authority responsible for liturgical life, must be more innovative and in fact do more to foster liturgical line and not primarily control it. To do this the CDW would have to intensify contact with the liturgy offices of the respective bishops’ conferences – and this in the sense of an exchange in both directions. It should not only be directives coming out from the Apostolic See. The CDW would have to be more deeply aware of what is happening in various places in the life of the church, what necessities and new developments there are. The Apostolic See should respond to these things appropriately, insofar as this is possible at the level of the central church authority.What influence does this authority have upon liturgy in Switzerland?Klöckener: In recent years there have repeatedly been documents from the CDW with primarily disciplinary character. The CDW reacts to particular developments which it labels as “abuse” or divergence from the official line.Can you name examples?Klöckener: Lay preaching. The Swiss bishops’ conference is regularly told at its ad limina visits to the Vatican that canon law actually prohibits preaching of lay people in the liturgy. As is known, some bishops have reacted to this.Another example is general absolution. This was customary and permitted in Switzerland since the 1970s. In 2009, under pressure from the CDW, the Swiss bishops’ conference prohibited it. This can be debated theologically; but certainly a valuable and acknowledged element of penitential practice has been lost.How does general absolution happen?Klöckener: It took place in liturgical services. First there were Scripture readings and prayers and a communal examination of conscience to reflect upon one’s own life. Then general absolution was imparted to all the faithful present, without their having confessed their sins individually. General absolution is in fact a form of penance foreseen for emergency situations. But it was introduced in Switzerland at that time with a view toward the pastoral situation in the country – moreover, with Roman approval. Thus it was not an act of disobedience. As I say, the CDW revoked the permission.The CDW also has to make delicate decisions. For example, disciplinary cases, or impediments to ordination for priesthood candidates, or marriage annulments. Do you know of such decisions?Klöckener: I do not know how the CDW rules in particular cases. I am not any more fully informed about its concrete dealing with marriage dispensations. Regarding this, of course, the pope has established changes. Moreover, in the last restructuring, responsibility for the “discipline of the sacraments” was assigned to the CDW. Previously it only had competency for liturgy.These measures affect people as individuals.Klöckener: Yes. Decisions that affect the faith life of an individual are not publicly communicated. It’s a matter of protection of the personal realm. By contrast, if a diocese adds a new saint and the CDW gives approval for liturgical veneration, it is published in a decree.But decisions about individual cases would be interesting – they oftentimes indicate the direction.Klöckener: What this Congregation would need, in my opinion, is more understanding of the scholarly field and more opening. This is apparent in the conflict about the liturgical books. Since 2001 the Vatican demands a retranslation of these books according to narrow prescriptions in the sense of greater literalness. This led to quarrels. Only the English Missal is completed. The German-language bishops’ conferences have put a stop to the process after the translations were completed. They held that such a literal translation of the liturgy would ultimately do damage to the life of faith. At the time it is an open question whether the CDW and the French-language bishops’ conferences can come to agreement around the French translation, where similar difficulties have come to light.Perhaps this is also a reason why Bishop Charles Morerod from west Switzerland and the French bishop Bernard-Nicolas Aubertin were called to be members of the congregation. Aubertin is president of the French liturgy commission. The nomination of both of them could certainly stand in connection to the open question of the future of the new French translation of the missal. The pope would then be strengthening the role of the local churches in this process.
Nov 13 16 2:41 AM
His toes curl in pain, his veins bulge from exertion, his bony chest heaves in the last throes of death.The newly restored 14th-century wooden crucified Christ "has been resurrected" from obscurity -- once caked over with dark paint and left forgotten behind an elevator shaft, said Cardinal Angelo Comastri, archpriest of St. Peter's Basilica."We have discovered a hidden treasure under the dust of many centuries," he told reporters at a Vatican news conference Oct. 28.The oldest crucifix in the basilica's possession, it was made by an unknown sculptor of "exceptional artistic talent" and technical skill sometime in the early 1300s, and hung in the original fourth-century basilica of St. Peter, built by the Emperor Constantine, said Bishop Vittorio Lanzani, secretary of the Fabbrica di San Pietro, the office responsible for physical care and maintenance of St. Peter's Basilica.The 7-foot-long torso and legs were made in one piece from a solid trunk of seasoned walnut, he said. The arms -- spanning nearly 6 and a half feet -- and head were carved separately but came from the same already centuries' old tree.Antique prints and a rich trail of archival material track the crucifix's condition and its various locations inside the old basilica and its transfer to the new basilica when it was completed in 1620. The documents show that no matter where it was positioned, it was a popular and much-venerated piece of work, the bishop said.It even managed to survive the Sack of Rome in 1527 and desecration when the basilica was turned into a "horse stable" and the Christ figure was dressed in the uniform of the invading mercenaries, he said.Though made of strong solid wood, he said, termites feasting on it for 700 years caused considerable damage, leaving bore holes peppering the face and body and excavating large areas by the armpits.Early restorers filled the gaping holes with wads of cloth, reinforced weakened areas with canvas wrappings and stucco, and hid dirt, discoloration and black termite burrows with dark "bronze-colored" paint, the bishop said.Moved in 1749 to make way for Michelangelo's marble masterpiece, the Pieta, the progressively darkening statue was gradually moved further and further away from the main area of the basilica, eventually ending up in closed chapel.Even worse, Bishop Lanzani said, Pope Pius XI had an elevator put in the closed chapel to connect the basilica with the papal residence above in the apostolic palace."Darkened and confined in a neglected spot and nearly unreachable, it was forgotten by many and was in some way taken away from the devotion of the faithful," he said.When Pope Francis called the Year of Mercy, the basilica accelerated plans to have the crucifix studied and restored, which took 15 months of difficult and delicate work, Cardinal Comastri said. Because moving it too far from where it had been abandoned was too risky, the canon's sacristy nearby was turned into a makeshift restoration studio.With funding from the Knights of Columbus, restorers used thermal lasers to blast off one layer of paint at a time and "cutting-edge" solvents that dissolve specific substances like oils, lacquers and grime, leaving desired colors unaltered, said one of the lead restorers, Lorenza D'Alessandro.Experts monitored their progress with stereo microscopes -- which are often used in microsurgery -- to make sure they removed only selected areas and layers. She said they identified nine successive layers of paints, varnishes and protective coatings on the body and 15 layers on the white, gold-bordered loincloth.They filled the gaps, she said, by mixing the sawdust left behind by the termites with a binding material that was then shaped to the body. They replaced a thick painted rope that had been wrapped around Christ's head with a crown of real thorn branches from a species known as Christ's Thorn found near the Mediterranean.The original cross the Christ had been nailed to was lost long ago, she said, so workers at the Fabbrica crafted a new one from seasoned walnut wood that had grown near an ancient Marian sanctuary in central Italy.Cardinal Comastri said the newly restored crucifix will be shown to the public for the first time Nov. 6 during Pope Francis' jubilee for prisoners to be "a beautiful sign of hope and a message of mercy."It will then be placed back in the main part of the basilica in the Chapel of the Blessed Sacrament and dedicated in "perpetual memory of the Jubilee of Mercy."It will be hung on the wall to the left of the entrance, so when people enter, they will immediately be met by Christ's gaze at the very moment he readies himself to give his life for all of humanity, he said.The Knights provided the funding for its restoration to show "solidarity with the Holy Father" for the Year of Mercy, said Carl A. Anderson, supreme knight of the Knights of Columbus.In a written statement, he said, "We hope that this remarkable image of Christ's suffering will serve as a reminder to all who see it of the great love our savior has for each of us, and of the depths of his mercy, always ready to embrace and forgive us."
Nov 29 16 7:49 AM
Evangelii Gaudium promotes authentic liturgy. A turning point toward a sixth Instruction on the Reform of the Liturgy?In the structure of Pope Francis’s pontificate – it cannot be said frequently enough – the liturgy has a place, not of “direct discourse,” but rather of “indirect practice.” This is because the Pope is a “son of the Council,” which he incarnates in supple and concrete ways. In his Masses at Casa Santa Marta, his Wednesday audiences, and his Sunday homilies, as well as in his major discourses and specifically liturgical measures (for example, the modification of the rubrics of the Holy Thursday foot-washing), it is clear that Francis celebrates the liturgy with “the joy of the Gospel.”But there is more. Francis’s “programmatic” text, Evangelii Gaudium, lays out an ecclesial vision of a church on mission – like a “field hospital” – in a way that draws new attention to the relationship between liturgy and life, and between liturgy and culture. This vision is expressed in Francis’s intention to decentralize curial power, entrusting to regional episcopacies competence that is even doctrinal in character. The appropriation of such decentralization within the teaching of Evangelii Gaudium itself is already highly significant.All of this contrasts fundamentally with what has been happening in the area of liturgy for the past fifteen years, since the promulgation of the Fifth Instruction “For the Right Implementation of the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy,” Liturgiam Authenticam (2001). That document has effectively stalled at the universal level every effort at authentic inculturation of the liturgy. Liturgiam Authenticam called for a universal retooling the liturgy based on its Latin prototype – one that is inevitably static and closed off – by favoring an obstinately and scholastically literal translation and by pretending that the vernacular languages bear the same structure and rhetorical elements as Latin. This has been, from the beginning, a project lacking any solid foundation, not only in simple, human experience, but also in the tradition of the Church.Never has the “receiving language” been treated with such disregard. It is as though knowledge of the original text is essential to understanding its translation! But when a language that is no longer taught by any mother to her child becomes the sole and decisive measure of the living languages, who can stand to live within such a “Clockwork Orange”? Who could have devised such an abstruse and self-referential system? If the entire structure is determined by a language that “has no future” – which is the case for Latin, a language without the capacity for renewal, a quality that some find reassuring, because that means it is also deprived of a history – how long will it be before tradition is reduced to nothing more than a “wax museum”?After a troubled fifteen-year reign, Liturgiam Authenticam has reached the end of its line. Not only have legitimate criticisms been raised from the start, from both doctrinal and pastoral points of view, but the facts have demonstrated it to be, throughout these years, both flawed in theory and virtually inapplicable in practice. And where the matter has been forced despite these problems, the result has been liturgical texts that are technically “correct” documents – that is, consistent with poorly conceived norms – but which lack, as a result, any relationship with living language, real life, and the lived faith of those for whose use the texts are intended. At the root of everything is not a philological problem, but a theological and anthropological one: a rigid tradition and the presumption that the experience of the liturgical subject is unimportant.Bishops today, throughout the world, find themselves between a rock and a hard place: they want to continue to “obey Rome,” of course; but they also want to and must serve the faith of their people. They know very well that obeying in Rome means producing unusable texts. But they also know that promoting real growth of their church means they must deviate substantially from the “Roman criteria.” The only possible solution is to “stop everything.” Ask for nothing from Rome, in order to avoid tripping up the distorted central control process, for fear that evolution will become devolution and that obedience will generate still more confusion and encourage only the most sectarian spirits.The literalistic radicalism of Liturgiam Authenticam has generated division and despair, and this was easily predictable fifteen years ago. It is clear now that the most widespread sentiment among the leadership of episcopal conferences throughout the world is fear. In fifteen years, Liturgiam Authenticam has produced – at least among the hierarchy – a real “angor liturgicus,” an anxiety and suffering that have now reached intolerable levels. The “joy of the gospel” cannot coexist with the “fear of the liturgy.” And if we start, in liturgical matters, with “luctus et angor” – a phrase which was included in the original title of what eventually became the conciliar Constitution Gaudium et Spes – how can we possibly take up the true and great revival of the conciliar gaudium and spes that Pope Francis calls us to? Evangelii Gaudium envisions a church on mission, capable of an authentic liturgy. But there can be no authentic liturgy until we reject the lifeless and defensive stance of Liturgiam Authenticam, which will only give us a church that is closed and locked in its own past, where the liturgy becomes a “diocesan museum,” with air conditioning and bulletproof glass cases.This is now the conditio sine qua non: either a new, sixth instruction on liturgical reform is written, or we will be increasingly dominated by fear, paralysis, and immobility. And the good Roman officials, locked in their offices, will continue to spend their time passing judgment on individual words, the signs of peace, the different forms of singing, the overlooked Latin structures … their gaze directed only toward the past, without joy, fearful of the slightest liturgical abuse, ignoring the customs and the great and inexhaustible experience of men and women. But even these officials are among the victims: Liturgiam Authenticam has “forced them” to work this way! How is it possible that it takes a letter from the pope explicitly asking for the reform of a rubric in order for them to “open their eyes” and take a breath? Surely the Congregation’s task should be one of stimulus, of openness, of momentum. How can there be, in a Church that sees itself essentially on mission, a congregation that specializes only in locks and alarm systems? I believe that a rediscovery of our “vocation to joy” can only happen if that congregation is able to adopt, finally, a new instruction. Too much time and energy has been spent over the past fifteen years on efforts to avoid applying principles that are inapplicable, both in theory and in practice.In the present stage of our history, we do not need liturgical lamentations; we need hymns to joy. I know that many experts, theologians, and pastors would be ready and willing to collaborate in preparing an instruction that translates Evangelii Gaudium into practical guidelines for an area so important as the liturgy. We need, in short, a text that puts into practice the Sacrae Liturgiae Gaudium! And we need to bring to an end these disciplinary and institutional contortions that only result in paralysis and lost time, and that are founded not on joy but on fear, not on hope but on resignation.Rather than creating “unrealities” – like artificial languages based on Latin that do not exist and will never exist, even by the decree of a Roman congregation – let us heed the invitation to give primacy to reality, to truly step outside the walls we have built around us, to breathe pure air, to speak in living languages, to be among our brothers and sisters, to take in the smell: let us write, now, a new instruction. It is the only way we will be able to restore a little common sense.
Dec 2 16 1:52 AM
Dec 11 16 2:32 AM
Hark the herald angels: How sacred music evangelizes, lifts up heartsVATICAN CITY (CNS) -- 'Tis the season for a huge assortment of holiday concerts and carols to choose from, making Advent and Christmas a unique period for reminding people of the evergreen beauty of sacred music.And music can be that gentle lure that helps welcome and embrace those who have become distant from the church, said one liturgy and music expert.Like weddings and baptisms, "Christmas is a great time" to reach out and offer people an experience that encourages them to return to church more regularly, said Paul Inwood, a British composer and former director of liturgy and music for the Diocese of Portsmouth."When it comes to Christmas, I'm always very aware of the people who perhaps come just once or twice a year" to church, he told Catholic News Service by phone in early December.For that reason, he said, the music that parishes program should be "beautiful and magnificent," but also "hospitable" and "accessible" to everyone.Because "you can't find anything more religious and more joyful in sacred celebrations than the whole congregation expressing its faith and devotion in song," Inwood said.Msgr. Vincenzo De Gregorio, who heads the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music in Rome, told CNS that accessibility means respectfully matching the complexity of the music to the abilities of the congregation so that everyone can participate and feel elevated by the music.Inwood said before the Second Vatican Council, liturgical music was performed by choirs and the people in the pews were spectators."After Vatican II, the kind of liturgy that we had changed its nature and went back to the traditions of the earlier church when participation in the liturgy was the norm," he said. (If that's the case, then why are the "ultra-conservatives" who are so bent on "preserving Church tradition" so angry about the post-Vatican II liturgies?)Music was now seen "as a ministry, rather than a performance, and it serves the people and helps them lift up their voices and praise to God," said the composer.This push for musical reform was already well underway before the Second Vatican Council, Msgr. De Gregorio said, which is why the pontifical institute was founded in 1911 by St. Pius X. The institute was established to respond to the growing belief that "the people must sing," he said.The institute teaches religious and laypeople from all over the world about liturgical music as well as giving them the practical skills to include and promote new forms of artistic expression appropriate to the present culture and people.The tendency toward inclusion is a unique characteristic of the Latin-rite Catholic Church, said the monsignor, who is an expert in the pipe organ and Gregorian chant, and has degrees in sacred theology and modern literature.Roman Catholicism was heavily influenced by "the ancient Roman mentality," he said, which saw that expanding into new territories and spreading its influence meant including and assimilating all that was good and useful from the local cultures.This history of inclusion "is the secret of the development of music" and all arts, he said.The Latin-rite Catholic Church "never chose one style. It never said 'no'" to new developments and allowing instruments, which "for around 1,000 years were never used in (Christian) worship because they stunk of paganism."Instruments first used by pagan Greece and Rome -- like the organ, flute, trumpet and string instruments -- are today considered by many to be uniquely sacred instruments, the priest said."In her wisdom," he said, the church embraces appealing local traditions and elevates them, finds a way to fold them into the sacred.That's why the institute is so important, he said, because the desire for inclusion was never about "wanting to lower the level" of standards, but to skillfully elevate the music of the people to a higher plane."Here then is the reason for our school, to create and form people who can make music of the highest level," he said.He said he thinks the debate over "folk" versus "traditional" forms of music stems from an "ignorance" about music in general.Fears that "the church has abandoned its great music" find fertile ground "where there is no widespread musical culture" in schools and parishes, and people lack basic skills in reading or understanding music, he said.Problems and polemics occurred, he said, where the reform of liturgical song was "introduced without the necessary preparation."The answer, then, isn't "creating an aristocracy" of experts, but of increasing awareness and preparation for everyone so they can hold onto, develop and appreciate musical traditions.Education and formation, he and Inwood said, have to tackle both fronts: the risk that clergy don't understand music and its proper expression, and the risk that musicians don't know enough about liturgy.Inwood said "there's a lot of goodwill" on both sides to do the right thing, but people need to understand how music is "integral to the rite and not just an optional stuck on top of it, which is how it sometimes comes across.""The music needs to fit the ritual like a glove," which requires people understand not just music, but also "what liturgical action is doing so they can tailor the music to what is going on," a skill not unlike what composers do when fitting musical scores to action unfolding on film or the stage.Being respectful of the ritual and sensitive to the congregation mean sacred music can shine anywhere -- whether it's a parish in a poor shantytown or in a monumental cathedral, the two men said.It doesn't depend solely on resources like a pipe organ or a professional choir, Inwood said, it's about "authenticity.""You can do wonderful things with what you have," even just a cantor and assembly, he said. "The music isn't inferior in any way, it's just different and reflects who the community is at that particular point" and aims to draw them together in praise."It's much better to do (music) you can manage and do it well than try very hard to do things you can't achieve," he added.
Dec 31 16 7:23 AM
I am a member of the oldest choir in the world. As early as the 5th and 6th centuries there are records of singers being part of the papal entourage, today, some 1,500 years later, the role of the Sistine Chapel choir (officially, the Cappella Musicale Pontificia) remains the same, namely, to sing for the pope. You will have heard of the phrase “a capella” singing. This literally refers to the Sistine Chapel (the “capella”), and to the unaccompanied style in which the choir has been singing ever since it was installed in the world famous “Cappella Sistina” in the 15th century.The choir has had various high and low points over the centuries. The 1500s Renaissance golden age and the 1900s Perosi revival are some of the highs. But in the second half of the 20th century, the choir went through a period of decline and found itself with the nickname “the Sistine screamers”. Today, after a period of intense study and hard work, we’re very happy to have left that particular moniker far behind, and to be breaking new ground in recordings, repertoire and research.But changes come slowly – this is the Vatican after all. It was only 100 years ago that the last castrato retired, after 30 years of service in the choir. Today, the high parts are sung by boys’ treble voices – as they would have been in Renaissance times – the men no longer have to be ordained, unmarried, or even Italian, although I’m still one of only three foreigners in the choir and I’m its first British full-time member. I still have to pinch myself as I stand under Michelangelo’s extraordinary frescoes, singing music much of which was written five, 50 or 500 years ago for this very choir to be performed in this very place, for this very acoustic.When you are a singer – or any kind of artist – looking for work, you invariably spend a lot of time being in the wrong place at the right time and the right place at the wrong time. If you’re lucky and persistent you may end up being in the right place at the right time. I joined the choir two years ago. My previous job was as the flower presenter at Covent Garden. Yes that is actually a job – although not one you can retire on – but for me, a trainee singer, what I learnt standing in the wings and watching the world’s most incredible singers night after night was as valuable as several years at a conservatoire.I had come to Italy to research its opera houses, and it was in that capacity I went to talk to Massimo Palombella, the Sistine chapel choir’s director. We discussed at length the British and Italian choral traditions – he is very knowledgeable about the English choral tradition and reveres it greatly. Next door, the choir happened to be just about to start a rehearsal, and, at the end of our meeting he opened the door saying, “Right, there’s the choir, go and join them!” and so I joined the basses. It’s quite a way to do an audition! I must have done OK, as there followed several return trips to Rome to sing with the choir, and eventually a four-month trial period, and in September 2015 I was accepted as a full-time member.Maestro Palombella was appointed by Pope Benedict in 2010 under strict instruction to transform this ancient institution into a world-class choir. The unfortunate “Sistine screamers” tag had come about because over the past few decades the choir had grown in size and had moved from the small chapel into the vast St Peter’s Basilica, and was singing Palestrina and our revered Renaissance heritage as if it were bel canto opera, and this was being broadcast around the world live on Vatican Radio and TV.And so the first thing Maestro Palombella did was to electronically map the acoustic in the Sistine Chapel. We’re the Sistine choir and must sing in a way that is pertinent to the Sistine Chapel even if our bread and butter job is to sing for papal masses in the Basilica once or twice a week. The Sistine’s intimate acoustic was then reproduced in the Basilica using speakers and microphones. So now, when we sing in the much larger space, we’re amplified in a way that recreates the authentic Sistine acoustic and we can hold on to the choir’s core repertoire – the many Renaissance masterpieces of early polyphony – and take them it out into the big public showroom.Another crucial change that Maestro Palombella has wrought has been the revival in Renaissance singing, and an “authentic” style. By which I mean singing the music in the most appropriate and pertinent way to get as close as we can to how the music was intended to sound. Italian music is always about melody (in contrast to German music, say, which is more harmonically driven). The emphasis must always be on the overall sweep, on the melodic line and phrasing. It is an idea that developed in the Renaissance and goes all the way through Italian music even to Puccini. And it was developed here, in the Sistine Chapel, in particular with Palestrina. Each part in Palestrina’s choral music is a song which fits in with another song, and they all fit together.It is not enough to have reverence and respect for historical tradition, we must also have genuine curiosity and enquiry. Maestro Palombella is the Indiana Jones of Renaissance polyphony. He – and he alone – has 100% access to the Vatican’s archives, the biggest collection of Renaissance music in the world. Two years ago he found the earliest edition of Allegri’s Miserere (Sistine codex 1661) perhaps the most famous work written for the choir. Previously, everyone had been singing an edition from around 1900 that included the famous top Cs and elaborate ornamentation. But no Renaissance composer ever wrote a top C – that was an embellishment added by showing-off castrati. Prior to the codex being excavated from the Vatican’s archives, no-one had ever heard what Allegri actually wrote. We recorded that here in the chapel itself, in the the first ever studio recording made in the Sistine Chapel for our 2015 album Cantate Domino.For me, though, Palestrina’s music is the culmination of the Renaissance, and the Missae Papae Marcelli is his masterpiece, a sublime and graceful marriage of words and music. Our new album Palestrina features his astonishing Missa Papae Marcelli, as well as a Palestrina motet written for the choir but that had been gathering dust in the archives for perhaps over 400 years: his Benedixisti, Domine.Palestrina was Director of Music for the Cappella Guilia – the choir of St Peter’s Basilica next door (he was married so couldn’t be part of the Sistine Chapel choir whose singers had to be ordained), but he knew the singers of Cappella Musicale Pontificia well and wrote much of his music for them and to sing in the Sistine Chapel. Recording this and every other piece on the CD in the Sistine Chapel means that we’re recording in the exact acoustic these pieces were written for. It’s rare you can make that claim.In our quest for an authentic sound, we put down carpets in the Sistine Chapel for recording in order to soften the reverberation, as we know that in Palestrina’s time there would have been the Raphael tapestries (now in the next-door Vatican museum) on the wall which would have affected the acoustic.We have to forget our modern way of understanding and reading music, and understand the music in a way which is pertinent to the 15th century. Palestrina wrote for a choir of around 18 singers, for boys and men, but not for castrati (they came to Italian choral music later), and he wrote music without bars or a time signature. That’s not to say that he wrote in a non-rhythmic way – he wrote according to the text. The phrasing, the words, were everything. Meanwhile there was no such thing back then as equal temperament. That wasn’t to come until almost two centuries later. The idea of a fixed “C” simply didn’t exist. And the reason we know which note to start on is because we know that the alto line would not have gone higher than what we now call a B-flat, so everything is tuned according to the top note of the alto line. So long as everything is in relation to that, everything fits.Of course we don’t know if we’re absolutely right, but we think we’re getting there. But then again perhaps 50 years from now people will look back and say, “What they hell were they doing?! … don’t they realise it should all be sung with … I don’t know … tambourines!?”
Jan 18 17 12:35 AM
The Church is not Google TranslateAn interview with Andrew Grillo, professor of liturgy at the Pontifical Atheneum of St. Anselm.Within the Catholic Church, there is a debate among experts on the liturgy. One of its flashpoints is the document Liturgiam authenticam (2001). We discuss it here with the theologian Andrea Grillo, a professor of liturgy at the Atheneum of Saint Anselm in Rome.Professor, there is a debate in the Church of Rome, which at first might seem only to be of interest to the “insiders,” but which is in reality important to all the people of God. We are talking about translation of the liturgy. As you know, the Second Vatican Council initiated a Copernican revolution in Catholic liturgy. Under Pope John Paul II, the document Liturgiam authenticam was issued. It provides the criteria for the translation of the liturgy from Latin to the various languages. We know that the current Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship is the ultra-conservative Cardinal Sarah, who dreams of a “reform of the reform” of the Catholic liturgy. What, in your view, are the limitations of Liturgiam authenticam?The first thing to say is that the 2001 document is part of a long chain of texts produced by the central magisterium – papal and curial – between the late 1980s until the first decade of the new century. All these documents are united by one characteristic: they are the fruit of fear. They are a reaction to the trust and confidence that the Second Vatican Council had introduced into the Church of the 1960s and 1970s, overcoming the anti-modern trauma that had paralyzed the Church for more than a century. Now we move back to the old mistrust and suspicion. They brought back the nineteenth-century frame of mind. In this particular case, it is the mistrust and suspicion of modern languages and modern cultures. The authority to translate them has been taken away, and keeping in line requires a method of translation from Latin that yields a result that is, one can say without exaggeration, comic: If you follow the rules laid down, the resulting text is incomprehensible; but if you want a text that is understandable, you have to violate the rules. This is the experience of all the national episcopal conferences for the past 15 years. It is happening widely. The events related to the Missal translation into English, German, French, and Italian are just the best known examples.How is it possible that a “Church in missionary outreach” [the reference is to Pope Francis’s frequent call for a “Chiesa in uscita”] is now so preoccupied with textual fidelity to Latin?The issue is that Latin became the symbol of an untouchable and mummified tradition. Latin is made the focus of attention in order to avoid dealing with reality. But one must recognize that Latin, the language in which the Church expressed itself for 1500 years, is neither the Church’s original language nor the one in use today. The Latin language is no longer alive, because it is no longer spoken by children. Dante understood this 700 years ago. This doesn’t mean we can be ignorant of Latin. But it does not justify the reactionary illusions of those who want us to “start from the Latin.” Today you have to be able to start from French, English, Italian…At the liturgical level, in your opinion, what improvements would render the liturgy a more effective means of the inculturation of the Gospel?Precisely at the level of “translation,” we must recognize that the modern languages can express aspects of the tradition that the Greek and Latin were unable to express. Each language has its pros and its cons. Even Latin and Greek have limitations that the French or English can overcome. In every case, the translation must always be faithful and respectful. But you have to define what that means: fidelity and respect towards a text must keep in mind two subjects: who wrote it and who reads it. As a result, a good translation is never simply literal. Language is always much more complex than a sequence of words. For word-for-word translation, we turn to Google Translate. The Church should look farther, as it always has.Can you offer examples?We don’t have to provide obscure and extraordinary examples of inculturation. The act of worship is by its very nature inculturated. This was the experience of the apostles Peter and Paul, of Pope Gregory the Great, and of the theologian St. Thomas Aquinas. Anyone who wants to lock the church into a literal translation from the Latin does not know its two-thousand year history and is guided solely by a visceral and boorish anti-modernism.Benedict XVI promulgated the document Summorum Pontificum, which deregulated the celebration of the Tridentine rite. Isn’t this contrary to the spirit of the Council? What does Pope Francis think? You ask me “What does Pope Francis think?” I answer simply: Francis thinks. This is enough. If you really think about the question, you can’t ignore the theological and pastoral mess, this parallelism of incoherent and conflicting forms. How to change it, in what timeframe and with what approach, are among the array of opportunities that depend not only on the thing, but also on the context. And the Pope knows this and thinks about it properly.How prominent are these traditionalistic positions in the Church?In terms of numbers, they are few. In terms of media attention, they are great. However, one must carefully distinguish between different nations and churches. Not all countries are the same and not all the churches are on the same level. The question of dealing with traditionalists becomes unmanageable if you must follow universal rules that are valid for the whole Church. Only the competence of individual bishops, who know the local differences, can address it adequately.Would you like to add anything?I want to tell a story that may help to explain the issue. I heard it from Rita Levi Montalcini, on television. Many years ago, a new piece of translation software was introduced, which could translate anything from any language. But literally. A clever provocateur went to the debut event and put the whole system in crisis. He asked for a translation into Chinese of the English axiom “out of sight, out of mind.” The computer translated it into Chinese characters. Then the same person asked for a translation into Italian. And the result was “invisibile imbecille” [invisible imbecile]. If you miss the axiom’s metaphorical sense, it is completely misunderstood. On the basis of Liturgiam authenticam, we risk continually producing translations like “invisible imbecile.”Ninety percent of the liturgy is metaphorical language. To attempt to translate it literally is purely illusory. Through fear, disasters are created. Freedom and creativity are demonized. But without freedom, metaphors cannot be understood. It is enough to point to Liturgiam authenticam’s rule that translations must respect the rhetorical figures in the Latin original. But this is precisely what that you can never do. Each language has its own unique figures. Translating is not imposing the rhetorical figures of one language upon another, but to mediate between one and the other. And for this, one needs freedom. We can’t sell our birthright for a mess of pottage.
Jan 22 17 9:23 PM
© 2017 Yuku. All rights reserved.