Matt Fradd's Blog, page 4

4 Reasons to Celebrate Mass Ad Orientem

In today’s “liturgy wars,” one of the most common debates is whether Mass should be celebrated ad orientem (priest and people face the same direction) or versus populum (priest faces the people).

Ad orientem has always been the orientation of the Traditional Latin Mass. The Novus Ordo is usually celebrated versus populum, but some people argue that it was intended to be carried out ad orientem as well. A few parishes follow this practice.

Here are four reasons why Mass ad orientem is preferable.

1. Canonical
Many supporters of versus populum point to paragraph 299 in the General Instruction on the Roman Missal, which states: “The altar should be built separate from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible.”

However, the original Latin of this passage is a little ambiguous. It’s not clear whether it’s saying Mass should always be said facing the people or allowing it as an option. If the passage calls for the former, it seems strange that it would introduce this big shift in liturgical posture in such an incidental way.

2. Historical
Christian worship grew from Jewish roots. In ancient synagogue worship, the people faced Jerusalem. Many Catholics have argued that our worship should also face east “toward Jerusalem.”

Ad orientem is an ancient practice. Although there’s also evidence of Mass being celebrated ad populum in the early Church, the Church favored ad orientem through most of the past millennium. One needs really good reasons to break with this development and return to earlier traditions.

3. Theological
Many Medieval theologians argued that Mass attendees should face east since that was the direction (in their cosmology) in which the heavenly bodies moved — symbolizing the heavenly Jerusalem we journey toward. Also, Christ said He would come from the East.

Additionally, even though the celebration of Mass versus populum emphasizes that it is a sacred meal, the Mass is primarily a sacrifice. Worship should focus on this reality and should be theocentric.

4. Phenomenological
When the priest and people face the same direction, their total focus is on Christ. When the parties face each other, the priest sometimes worries more about how he looks to the people. The people, in turn, may shift focus from the sacrifice to the priest’s facial expressions and gestures.

None of this is to say that facing the people is bad. We’re talking about fittingness. The ad orientem posture better reflects the nature of the Mass, so maybe it’s time to bring it back everywhere.

The post 4 Reasons to Celebrate Mass Ad Orientem appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.

Cardinal Burke’s Reflections on the Post-Vatican-II Turmoil

During a recent interview with Cardinal Raymond Burke, we asked what it was like to live in the immediate aftermath of the Second Vatican Council (1962–65). Here’s his reply.

“[During Vatican II] I was in the seminary. I graduated from high school in 1966 and already the turmoil was starting. The council had ended in 1965, but things really ramped up.

“I did two years of junior college in our diocesan seminary in La Crosse, Wisconsin, then I went to the Catholic University of America to study philosophy. The philosophy program there was outstanding. To this day I’m so grateful for it. But the seminary was in complete turmoil.

“I lived through all of the liturgical abuses. When I read Summorum Pontificum and the letter that [Pope Benedict XVI] wrote to the bishops, he said it was practically more than a person could stand.

“I had grown up with wonderful catechesis— the Baltimore Catechism. We were instilled with a very deep understanding of our faith— I would say an understanding of our faith which formed us to know that we could always learn more. Those great definitions from the Catechism, they all led you to think more deeply about the reality. To say that a sacrament is an outward sign instituted by Christ to give grace — you can be unpacking that for the rest of your life.

“But I saw that all evaporate in this kind of ridiculous emphasis on experience without any proper instruction. Then, of course, the abuses in the liturgy. Then I saw so many priests who abandoned the active priestly ministry, so many religious sisters who abandoned their consecrated life. It was simply a time of great turmoil.

“Under Pope St. John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI, there’s been great progress made in restoring the sacredness of the sacred liturgy and also great efforts made to improve catechesis. Much more needs to be done, and that’s the way in which we must continue to go.

“I remember when I was in the high school seminary, there was a certain euphoria about the council. It was like it was a whole new age in the Church. I remember for a while being somewhat fascinated with that.

“I came from a good Catholic home….In the Catholic schools we had wonderful sisters and priests in the parish. The minor seminary had led us already into a serious Christian life. I couldn’t abandon that.

“This was a great grace: [In the seminary] there were always some very good priests, but also there were fellow seminarians who were good men. They called forth the best in a person. They were good friends in the sense that they led you to become the best person you could be.

“I was a young man, I didn’t see [things] as clearly as I think I see them today, but on the other hand, I couldn’t buy into [the abuses following the council].”

 

Image: https://flic.kr/p/rbfm3w

The post Cardinal Burke’s Reflections on the Post-Vatican-II Turmoil appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.

Use This Powerful Argument Against Abortion

There are many arguments against abortion. Some are strong, some are weak. Many Christians say they’re against it because the Bible or the Church tells them it’s wrong.

That’s fine, but those answers aren’t going to convince many pro-choicers. You need to rely on logic and testimonials from people harmed by abortion.

Here is the best logical argument against abortion.

Premise 1: It’s always wrong for big, strong people to kill little, weak, innocent people.
It’s hard for pro-choicers to deny this, especially since many of them admirably advocate for helping poor people, migrants and victims of violence. It’s human nature to protect those who are weaker than us.

Premise 2: The unborn are little, weak, innocent people.
This is often where abortion advocates disagree. They may regard unborn children as a clump of cells, not living human persons.

However, unborn children are alive. They meet the scientific criteria for a living being. They’re also members of the human species.

Some pro-choicers will say, “They’re not human, they’re fetuses.” They speak as if a fetus was the name of a species. But a fetus identifies a stage in the life of a member of a species, not the species itself.

Further, it’s hard to deny that the unborn child is a person. Challenge your pro-choice friend to explain when they think an unborn child becomes a person. Typically, they’ll mention a random stage in development or say they don’t know.

If it’s the latter, that’s an admission that abortion may be killing a person. If it’s the former, point out that they may inadvertently be justifying murder of certain types of people. For example, saying a child becomes a person once they can live outside of the womb makes their personhood dependent on location and degree of dependence. But does that mean it’s less wrong to kill a toddler than a young adult since the former is more dependent on the mother?

Conclusion: It is always wrong for the strong to kill the unborn.
If premises 1 and 2 are true, then this conclusion necessarily follows. If abortion supporters deny the conclusion, they need to refute one or both of the premises.

Don’t let them distract you with logical fallacies, such as trying to silence pro-life men by saying, “Men have no right to speak on abortion.” Keep them focused on the personhood of the unborn.

The post Use This Powerful Argument Against Abortion appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.

Do Eastern Nuns Wear Rosaries on Their Belts?

If you’ve ever seen Eastern nuns, you’ll notice an object dangling from their belts that looks like a Rosary. It’s actually a chotki, an Eastern Catholic prayer rope.

Connected to the rope is a beautiful prayer and a devotion you should consider adopting!

A chotki usually has 50 or 100 knots. Some ropes end in a tassel, which is traditionally meant to dry the tears coming from a contrite heart.

The chotki accompanies the recitation of the Jesus Prayer: “Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.” (There are other variations of this prayer with more or less words, but this is one of the most popular and ancient forms.)

Some Church Fathers talk about reciting the Jesus Prayer in rhythm with breathing to help us be in constant communication with our Lord. If you get in the habit of connecting the prayer with your breathing, you’ll start praying it throughout the day.

To tie the two together, recite the first half of the prayer like this: (Inhale) Lord Jesus Christ, (exhale) Son of God.” For the second half: (Inhale) have mercy on me, (exhale) a sinner.”

It’s like you’re breathing in His mercy and breathing out your sinfulness! Too often we think we have to be perfect before approaching God. But we need His grace to help us overcome our sins. This pattern of breathing/prayer reinforces this truth.

This technique also slows down the prayer, allowing you time to meditate on it.

You don’t have to be an Eastern Catholic to use the chotki or pray the Jesus Prayer, but please note: Praying it to the rhythm of your breath can be spiritually intense. We recommend talking to a spiritual director before you start.

As with the Rosary, you can add other prayers or meditations as you use your chotki to pray. Consider passages from the Psalms or the Gospels.

Why not give this powerful devotion a try?

The post Do Eastern Nuns Wear Rosaries on Their Belts? appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.

The Difference Between Liturgical Abuse and Liturgical Taste

Clown Masses, cheesy hymns, priests riding hoverboards to the altar — there is much to complain about when it comes to modern liturgies. Some actions are outright abuses of the most sacred act of Christian worship.

Other things at Mass that offend us are matters of personal taste. We love to dogmatize our preferences and force them on others with a magisterial air.

But in the case of liturgy, we need to clearly distinguish between an abuse and a matter of taste.

Liturgical Abuse
Liturgical abuse is when you break liturgical law. If the Church says, “Say these words of consecration,” and you use your own formula instead, you’re committing liturgical abuse.

Sadly, such abuse has become commonplace since the liturgical reforms following the Second Vatican Council. Thankfully, some modern popes have reigned things in, but we still have a long way to go.

Liturgical Taste
Many aspects of the liturgy aren’t regulated, such as the type of music used. We just have general guidelines. You can have a personal opinion that such-and-such music is not suitable for the liturgy, but featuring it in Mass is not liturgical abuse.

This doesn’t mean you can’t be critical of things you find offensive in the liturgy. You can argue that certain music is distasteful and doesn’t move people to prayer the way something else might.

The Church could make things easier and produce a list of music that’s suitable for the liturgy. But that would be difficult because the liturgy must make use of available musicians of varying skill sets. You may want to lift up souls by hiring a professional choir to sing the music of Palestrina, but if you have one volunteer musician and a small organ, you’ll have to adapt.

The bottom line is this: Before yelling “abuse,” when you see something at your parish Mass you don’t like, find out if the Church allows it. If it does, you can still charitably share your opinion, but don’t get mad at your pastor because he doesn’t follow your liturgical preferences.

He’s ministering to many other people besides you.

The post The Difference Between Liturgical Abuse and Liturgical Taste appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.

What Is Love?

We use the word “love” to describe many things and experiences: “I love coffee,” “I love my wife,” “I love my friends.”

There are similarities and differences between these kinds of love. You (hopefully) don’t love your husband or wife the same way you love your hamster. But there’s a common experience of goodwill and desire for union with another that both kinds of love entail.

Can we even define love in light of these different experiences? St. Thomas Aquinas speaks of four types of love, so let’s examine these.

1. Love is an emotion.
By “emotion,” St. Thomas means a movement of our external and internal senses toward something perceived as good and desirable. We take in data from our environment — the scent of flowers in the breeze, the face of a family member, or the taste of a delicious breakfast. These experiences elicit a response in us — desire — so that we can engage with, and profit from, them.

St. Thomas further describes this type of love as complacency in the good; i.e., pleasure. We recognize that the good thing obtained perfects us in some way.

For example, your friends perfect you and shape your life by being a source of comfort and strength and by challenging you to become the best version of yourself.

2. Love is a choice.
Because we are rational animals, we aren’t captive to all the goods that present themselves to our senses. A man may meet a woman whom he could marry, but he isn’t forced to marry her.

This type of love engages our free will in selecting what will help us meet our ultimate goals. When considering whom to marry, you choose the man or woman you think you’re most compatible with.

There are two movements of the soul connected to love as a choice: benevolence (to will the good) and beneficence (to do the good).

Forgiveness is a good example. We don’t feel affection for those who hurt us, but we can choose to forgive them.

3. Love is a relationship.
Love is shared between two or more people. According to Aristotle, friendship is willing the good of the other AND willing union with them. It’s a mutual giving and receiving of love.

Further, the relationship is based on some sharing or communication in the good. The nature of the good shared then determines the quality of the friendship. In the case of spouses it may be children, or in the case of buddies it may be a common enthusiasm for sports.

4. Love is a gift.
Here we’re talking about charity, which is our share in God’s divine life. Our Lord doesn’t merely give us good things, He gives us Himself! With charity, we’re acting with God’s own love for Himself and us.

Charity is the chief virtue and properly orders all the other virtues so that they lead to the right kind of love for God, neighbor, and self. We can’t act in this supernatural way without God gifting it to us

Not all of these loves are equal. For example, charity is more important than affectionate feelings. But all are important and play a role in our lives. Embrace them all, and let them lead you to Love Himself!

The post What Is Love? appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.

Was Archbishop Viganò’s Excommunication Justified?

On July 4, 2024, Pope Francis excommunicated Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò for schism. Archbishop Viganò has long been a hero in many Traditionalist circles for his criticism of the pope and openness to the Traditional Latin Mass.

Now even the Society of St. Pius X is distancing itself from the archbishop.

Was Archbishop Viganò’s excommunication justified? Yes. Here’s why.

What is schism?
We often think schism means that someone has a doctrinal disagreement with the Church. But that’s part of the definition of heresy. Schism is fundamentally a break of charity. Paragraph 2089 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church defines it as “the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him.”

That doesn’t mean one has to agree with the pope’s personal opinions. And one may even charitably seek clarification on the pope’s official actions in a way that doesn’t undermine fidelity and obedience to him.

But one has to maintain communion with the Supreme Pontiff and those subject to him. An example of schismatic behavior is refusing to attend a legitimate Novus Ordo Mass even when it’s your only option because you reject it.

Archbishop Viganò is guilty of schism.
Archbishop Viganò denied the legitimacy of Pope Francis’ pontificate when he said, “I maintain that the errors and heresies to which [Francis] adhered before, during and after his election, along with the intention he held in his apparent acceptance of the papacy, render his elevation to the throne null and void.” That, of course, amounts to a refusal to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

He has also rejected the authority of the Second Vatican Council, something no Catholic can do. At the close of the council, Pope St. Paul VI said, “[The Council] has invested its teachings with the authority of the supreme ordinary magisterium, which ordinary magisterium is so obviously authentic that it must be accepted with docility and sincerity by all the faithful, according to the mind of the Council as expressed in the nature and aims of the individual documents.”

Does Archbishop Viganò have legitimate grievances?
Sure he does! We live in a time of confusion, and many of us are frustrated that the Church hierarchy doesn’t do more to clarify things and defend the faith and tradition.

But this is no excuse to embrace schism. Christ didn’t promise us that the pope would always act in the best manner. He guaranteed that He would guide the Church and preserve the pope from error when he teaches infallibly.

Pope Francis has made many unclear, confusing statements, but none amount to heresy, as Archbishop Viganò claims.

Let us pray for the archbishop, who may truly believe he’s acting for the good of the Church. And let us pray for the pope, that he rises to the challenges of our age in a way that makes the truth of the faith shine with a new splendor throughout the world.

The post Was Archbishop Viganò’s Excommunication Justified? appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.

Cardinal Burke’s Advice for Those Tempted to Leave the Church

Does the constant chaos in the Church — bewildering statements from the pope and wayward clergy — ever make you look for greener pastures? Many Catholics are jumping ship into Sedevacantism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism and even atheism.

Cardinal Raymond Burke recently shared with us the advice he gives to Catholics who are tempted to leave the Church because of its problems.

“. . . I have encountered frequently — especially over the past years — people who see the sin in the Church and forget that the Church is not sin. The Church is a Divine reality. The Church was founded by our Lord Jesus Christ. The Church is holy in itself, but made up of sinful men who can, from time to time, cause this Church great suffering and tarnish the beauty of the Church by their scandalous behavior.

“My response is this: Christ told us, as he was about to ascend to the Father . . . he told the apostles to go out and to preach the gospel to all the nations, baptizing in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, communicating the Divine Life in every time and every place. And then he said, ‘And I will be with you until the last day,’ until his final coming. And he promised that, and I’m not going to abandon him.

“He’s in his holy Church. And no matter what anybody is doing — wherever it is — to distract from the beauty, from the truth that is in the Church, I’m going to remain with our Lord and be faithful to him and trust in his promise that he is with us, that he is going to make all of this right. But I certainly cannot see how I’m doing God’s will by abandoning our Lord in the Church.

“When he was in the Garden of Gethsemane undergoing his agony, he asked the apostles to watch with him, to pray with him . . . He suffers in his Church, but we’re there with him and we’re praying with him — praying with him and being faithful to what he teaches us.

“. . . St. Paul put it very plainly. He said if anybody teaches you — even an angel from heaven should arrive to teach you — something different from that which I’ve handed on to you — the sacred tradition — let him be anathema,’ excommunicated from the Church. 

“[W]e know that the devil hates our Lord. And he hates the fact that we human beings — the only earthly creatures made in God’s own image and likeness — can enjoy the friendship of God. And so he tries in every way, through his lies and deceptions, [to] draw us away from Christ. But we remain with him [Christ].

“My advice is stay with our Lord and His holy Church. Trust him and his promises. [In] your daily life — according to your vocation, according to whatever gifts God has given to you, whatever responsibilities you have— be absolutely the best Christian you can be.”

The post Cardinal Burke’s Advice for Those Tempted to Leave the Church appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.

Are American Catholics Too Patriotic?

Some people find Americans’ displays of patriotism surprising—from flying the flag in front of their homes to placing their hands over their hearts for the National Anthem.

This level of patriotism may be questioned by Catholics, in particular, for being excessive. After all, the U.S. still allows abortion, gay “marriage,” and other assaults on human dignity.

The Church does teach that patriotism is a virtue. But just like any other virtue, it can be taken to an extreme.

Here’s what authentic patriotism really looks like.

Patriotism is not nationalism.
The true patriot loves their nation and the people that live there. They rightfully prioritize their nation’s good before other countries the same way one looks after their family before tending to the needs of other people.

In his book “Memory and Identity,” Pope St. John Paul II talks about this connection between one’s nation and family:

“Nation and native land, like the family, are permanent realities. In this regard, Catholic social doctrine speaks of “natural” societies, indicating that both the family and the nation have a particular bond with human nature, which has a social dimension. Every society’s formation takes place in and through the family: of this there can be no doubt. Yet something similar could also be said about the nation.”

Yet patriotism excludes hatred of other nations and refuses to divinize the state. In fact, true love of country sometimes requires one to oppose their government if it assaults human dignity and undermines the common good.

For example, during World War II, the United States rightly opposed Japanese aggression. But the atomic bomb was an unjustified attack that destroyed countless innocent Japanese lives.

And while the Church does teach that a nation has a right to protect its borders, a nation should also be welcoming to those who, for good reason, come to it from other places to share in its blessings.

Patriotism is fueled by authentic freedom.
True freedom doesn’t mean doing whatever we want. That would lead to societal chaos. It means being free to choose acts of love. We have individual rights, but we are also responsible — to a degree — for the welfare of other people.

Ultimately, our allegiance belongs to God, not state. Putting God before state helps us properly love our nation by wanting its true good.

May the words of St. Thomas More before his death be our motto: “I am the king’s good servant, but God’s first.”

The post Are American Catholics Too Patriotic? appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.

Galileo and the Catholic Church Got in a Fight. Here’s Why.

Whenever secularists claim that the Catholic Church is anti-science, they usually bring up the infamous case of the Italian astronomer Galileo Galilei (1564–1642). Supposedly, the Church condemned and tortured Galileo for suggesting that the Earth and other planets go around the sun (heliocentrism). Many scientists at the time thought that the sun went around the earth (geocentrism).

It’s true that Galileo and the Church ran into conflict, but the story is more complicated than current retellings suggest.

At the time there were scientific arguments against heliocentrism.
Galileo struggled to prove heliocentrism, but pressured everyone to accept it. The Church and many scientists were more cautious.

Galileo’s challengers noted that if heliocentrism were true, we should see parallax shifts in the stars’ positions, but we don’t. (A parallax is when it looks like something you’re observing has moved when really you were the one who moved.) Galileo failed to respond to this challenge.

Further, Galileo claimed that the ocean’s waves were caused by the movement of the Earth. Scholars found this argument ridiculous.

Galileo mocked the Pope.
Pope Urban VII was actually open to Galileo’s ideas, but he urged caution since the scientist had so much riding against him. He gave Galileo permission to write a book where characters discuss the pros and cons of the geocentric and heliocentric models of the universe.

Galileo published the book under the title, “Dialogue Concerning Two Chief World Systems.” He named the proponent for geocentrism “Simplicio” (meaning “Simpleton”). The character became a mouthpiece for Pope Urban’s geocentric arguments. Unsurprisingly, the Pope took offense at being portrayed as a buffoon.

The Church eventually commanded Galileo to stop teaching heliocentrism, mostly because it was fed up with his behavior. It never officially condemned the heliocentric position as heresy.

Church authorities never tortured Galileo or even threw him into prison. He was put under a fairly comfortable house arrest in a country villa.

Did the Church handle this case perfectly? No. But the modern retelling of the brave scientist versus the science-hating Church is simply a myth.

The post Galileo and the Catholic Church Got in a Fight. Here’s Why. appeared first on Pints with Aquinas.