My Photo

May 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31

NEW BOOKS and DVDs available from IGNATIUS PRESS

Thursday, October 04, 2007

Dutch Bros. Coffee vs. Dutch Brothers Liturgies

Sandro Magister of Chiesa has penned a report about how some Dominicans in Holland are, in Magister's words, "inventing their own Mass." He writes:

In Nijmegen, Holland, in the church of the Augustinian friars, each Sunday the Mass is concelebrated by a Protestant and a Catholic, with one presiding over the liturgy of the Word and the sermon, and the other over the liturgy of the Eucharist, in alternation. The Catholic is almost always a layperson, and is often a woman. For the Eucharistic prayer, the texts of the missal are passed over in favor of texts composed by the former Jesuit Huub Oosterhuis. The bread and wine are shared by all.

No bishop has ever authorized this form of celebration. But Fr. Lambert van Gelder, one of the Augustinians who promote it, is sure that he is in the right: "In the Church there are different forms of participation, we are full-fledged members of the ecclesial community. I don't consider myself a schismatic at all."

Also in Holland, the Dominicans have gone even farther, with the consent of the provincials of the order. Two weeks before the motu proprio "Summorum Pontificum" went into effect, they distributed in all the 1,300 Catholic parishes a 9,500-word booklet entitled "Kerk en Ambt", "The Church and the Ministry," in which they propose to make into a general rule what is already practiced spontaneously in various places.

The proposal of the Dominican fathers is that, in the absence of a priest, a person chosen from the community should preside over the celebration of the Mass: "Whether they be men or women, homo or heterosexual, married or unmarried is irrelevant." The person selected and the community are exhorted to pronounce together the words of the institution of the Eucharist: "Pronouncing these words is not thought to be the sole prerogative of the priest. The words constitute a conscious declaration of faith by the whole community."

The booklet opens with the explicit approval of the superiors of the Dutch province of the Order of Preachers, and its first pages are dedicated to a description of what happens on Sundays in the churches of Holland.

Some of the details about this new "Mass":

The words of consecration are often replaced during the Mass by "expressions easier to understand and more in tune with modern faith experience." In the substitute rite, it often happens that non-consecrated hosts are added among the consecrated hosts, and all of them are distributed together for communion.

Within these practices, the Dutch Dominicans distinguish three widespread expectations:

– that men and women be selected "from below" to preside over the Eucharistic celebration;

– that, ideally, "this choice would be followed by a confirmation or blessing or ordination by Church authority";

– that the words of consecration "could be pronounced both by those who preside in the Eucharist and by the community from which they take their origin."

In the view of the Dutch Dominicans, these three expectations are well grounded in Vatican Council II.

The decisive action by the Council, in their judgment, was that of placing the chapter on the "people of God" before the one on the "hierarchical organisation built up from top downwards by the pope and the bishops" within the constitution on the Church.

That last paragraph is quite humorous—or, rather, the ideas of the Dutch Dominicans in question are rather humorous. First, because appeal to the order of chapters while ignoring the actual content is like saying that since the Christian Bible places Moses and David before Jesus, those men of God must be more important than the Son of God. And, secondly, the appeal to authority in order to denounce said authority leaves basic logic in shambles.

Here in Oregon there is a popular (and excellent) drive-thru coffee chain called Dutch Bros. Coffee. Normally, of course, I wouldn't compare coffee to liturgy, except in this case we are talking about really good coffee and a really irritating attempt to fake liturgy. Thus, I offer these reasons why I prefer Dutch Bros. Coffee over Dutch Brothers Liturgies:

1. The DBC coffee is real coffee. And it really good coffee. The DBL liturgies aren't real or good at all; they are invalid and illicit.
2. The DBC coffee tastes great. The DBL liturgies aren't so great. It sounds as though they stink, actually.
3. The DBC folks are trained and properly equipped to make espresso. The DBL folks—the laity—are not equipped (ordained) to make Mass happen.
4. You get your money's worth with a DBC beverage. You get ripped off when you attend a DBL "Mass."
5. The DBC folks, from what I can tell, obey their employer and respond positively to correction. The Dominicans in Holland don't seem to be interested in obedience or submission to Church authority.

There are probably even more apt comparisons to be made. If I think of more, I'll add them. In the meantime, I'm thinking about getting a Dutch Bros. mocha...

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Holy Grail!

Back on August 11th, Sandra Miesel guested on "Catholic Answers Live!" and spent the hour discussing the facts and the fiction about the Holy Grail. You can access it through the calendar page, or here in several audio media formats. Sandra and I can also be heard discussing the Coded Craziness on this March 17, 2006 "Catholic Answers Live!" program.

Wednesday, March 08, 2006

More tasteless Black humor

Readers of Eugene's Register-Guard (aka, Red Guard) get to read a letter to the editor each month (since there is a "one per month" limit) from a certain Ron Black of Junction City, Oregon, who delights in bashing Christians, political conservatives, and anyone else he doesn't like (which appears to include several billion people). The most recent example (March 7th, second letter from top) is mildly clever but mostly disgusting and ugly, akin to watching a music video made by a heavy metal group consisting of aging and frustrated Marxists:

After having been force-fed a steady diet of terrorist teriyaki in 2004, fearful Americans re-enthroned a delusional White House chef de cuisine who believes that he has a divine mandate to jam his recipe for theocracy down the nation's throat.

Consequently, a five-star evangelical eatery has its tables set for a battle between Planned Parenthood and the state of South Dakota. This fundamentalist food court is called Chez Scalitomas. And anti-choice members of its staff are now preparing the Lord's supper at One First Street NE in Washington, D.C.

For carnivores, the reactionary restaurant's road kill menu may soon feature eviscerated Roe vs. Wade served on a tasty bed of freshly slaughtered stare decisis. Vegans may be offered a delightful Garden of Eden salad topped with a heavenly creationist dressing intelligently designed by cordon bleu Bible-thumpers.

Voters asked for this born-again carte du jour. Now the meal they ordered from it is about to be served. Bon appetit!

Obviously, Mr. Black has some complaints with the establishment's service. But his mealy, unsavory metaphors lead, ultimately, to a single question about his overheated and thoroughly baked thinking. (Hat tip to James Taranto and the Opinion Journal.)

Thursday, August 25, 2005

Is Starbucks promoting homosexuality?

The Baptist Press News (BPNews) reports that after ten years of relative silence Starbucks is againStarbuckscup1 promoting homosexuality. Part of the evidence, according to BPNews, is on (not in, thankfully) the cup:

The world’s most famous coffee shop chain has begun a program called “The Way I See It,” which is a collection of thoughts, opinions and expressions provided by notable figures that now appear on Starbucks coffee cups, according to the chain’s website.

But one particular quote -- #43 -- blatantly pushes the homosexual agenda. It’s by Armistead Maupin, who wrote “Tales of the City,” a bestseller-turned-PBS drama advocating the homosexual lifestyle, and it reads:

“My only regret about being gay is that I repressed it for so long. I surrendered my youth to the people I feared when I could have been out there loving someone. Don’t make that mistake yourself. Life’s too [expletive] short.”

In case you don't know, Armistead Maupin is apparently "best-known for his six books in the Tales of the City series, which richly documented San Francisco’s gay community in the 1970s and ‘80s." (Richly? Didn't SF's gay community experience a lot of disease and death in the '70s and '80s?!)

Anyhow, as bad as this is, by itself I don't necessarily see it adding up to promoting homosexuality. That's mostly because other authors in "The Way I See It" series are on the other side of the political/social/cultural spectrum, including Jonah Goldberg, Michael Medved, and John Wooden. (Here is a full list of recent contributors.) In other words, wouldn't you have to accuse Starbucks of promoting neo-conservatism if you were going to accuse them of promoting homosexuality?

Far more bothersome is the recent public support given by Starbucks to gay pride parades in San Diego and Seattle, and to Planned Parenthood, both documented in the BPNews article and in an August 10, 2005, World Net Daily article. Perhaps it is time to stop going to Starbucks. Luckily for me, I got an espresso maker for home use last Christmas. The way I see it, I can live without a Mint Mocha Chip Frappuccino® blended coffee. It's the Caramel Macchiato that I'll miss...

Monday, May 16, 2005

Reason 1,453,640 that it's great to be Catholic...

Pope Benedict XVI endorses a German brewery that he used to visit from time to time. It brings to mind this quote from G.K. Chesterton, who penned a few things about the goodness of drink:

Doubtless, it is unnatural to be drunk. But then in a real sense it is unnatural to be human. Doubtless, the intemperate workman wastes his tissues in drinking; but no one knows how much the sober workman wastes his tissues by working. No one knows how much the wealthy philanthropist wastes his tissues by talking; or, in much rarer conditions, by thinking. All the human things are more dangerous than anything that affects the beasts - sex, poetry, property, religion. The real case against drunkenness is not that it calls up the beast, but that it calls up the Devil. It does not call up the beast, and if it did it would not matter much, as a rule; the beast is a harmless and rather amiable creature, as anybody can see by watching cattle. There is nothing bestial about intoxication; and certainly there is nothing intoxicating or even particularly lively about beasts. Man is always something worse or something better than an animal; and a mere argument from animal perfection never touches him at all. Thus, in sex no animal is either chivalrous or obscene. And thus no animal ever invented anything so bad as drunkenness - or so good as drink.

BTW, here is a link to the beer in question. And blogger Patrick O'Hannigan has even more info on his "Paragraph Farmer" blog, if you are so inclined...

Thursday, June 17, 2004

The Names Work!

It's good to have it work.

Blog powered by TypePad