Richard Chonak: January 2003 Archives

A posting over at Amy's on the subject of priest shortages brought forth dozens of comments, many on the theme famously expressed by Archbishop Curtiss that orthodox teaching and practice in a diocese encourage vocations. It's a reasonable connection to make, but I have to admit that attempts to prove it using statistics haven't worked.

An NOR article by Doug Tattershall arguing for the thesis actually gives numbers that show how weak it is: the top 20% of Mr. Tattershall's list includes not only famously orthodox Lincoln and Fargo but also more liberal Greensburg, Mobile, Lexington, Steubenville (despite FUS), Raleigh, Charlotte, St. Augustine, and Crookston.

On the other side, staunch Cdl. O'Connor's New York and Cdl. Law's Boston are not near the top as we'd hope, but down near the bottom of the list, along with liberal Richmond, L.A., and Honolulu.

A similar statistical summary for a three-year period is available on-line at Petersnet; search for the author's name, "Humm", to find the lists of "Ordinations - Per Capita". Daniel Humm's breakdown of the dioceses by size gives us a clue: high-ranking Mobile, Lincoln, and Fargo are all small and largely rural dioceses; big NYC, BOS, Brooklyn, and LA are near the bottom. Is diocesan size itself the factor -- in which case we'll have an argument for breaking up the mega-dioceses -- or is there something going on in cities that contributes to a low ordination rate?

If anybody out there has some geographical mapping software and would like to generate some graphics from the data, that might help us to figure it all out.

Canon 1370 says:

A person who uses physical force against a cleric or religious out of contempt for the faith, or the Church, or ecclesiastical authority or the ministry, is to be punished with a just penalty.

Note the distinction: if you use force against a priest out of contempt for the faith, that's a punishable offense under church law. But if you slap him up-side the head for some other reason -- for example, because of his obnoxious arrogance toward the Faith and the faithful -- well, the canon doesn't restrict that at all.

Today's candidate for an attitude adjustment is Rev. Thomas Quinlan of Virginia Beach. For starters, here's a profile from the Virginian-Pilot. He seems to be out to give his congregation entertainment: a Mass to compete with the Jerry Springer show.

In 1974, a Time magazine profile quoted him calling his parish ``spiritual white trash'' who casually drop into Mass to ``fill up at God's gas pump.''

Quinlan shocked more than a few Catholics when he rode down the center aisle of the Basilica of St. Mary of the Immaculate Conception on a police motorcycle, blue lights flashing, for the Palm Sunday procession.

Jaws dropped, too, when he dressed for Mass on one occasion as Superman, on others as the Grinch or the Blue Angel. And when he led the nearly all-black congregation to Suffolk to re-enact the trial of Nat Turner on Good Friday. And when, at a wedding in 1989, Quinlan went into detail about the sexual imagery invoked by the long, narrow candles used for the liturgy.

Really, do such tasteless stunts still go on? Are there really priests who think that shock and slapstick are the way to reach black Catholics?

The pitiful thing about this guy is that he plainly has some good intentions and some correct observations, coupled with a lot of error, and all of it delivered in a manner that a nearby pastor has called "crude and arrogant". For example, about half the points in his advice on proper conduct during Mass are correct, while the rest are rubbish.

(Thanks to Mark Sullivan.)

Scroll to the bottom of the linked page for the info.

The three emeriti had all passed the age of 75.

: this year's turnout for the March for Life was the second-largest I've seen: I haven't heard any estimates yet from March organizers, but I'd guess 75,000 attended. Tuesday night's Vigil Mass at the Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception -- can anyone convince Msgr. Bransfield to get the title shortened, please? -- had an enormous turnout, overflowing to the lower church and with standees in the vestibule.

Stranger than fiction? I love the way the March and the Vigil always seem to lead to unexpected meetings. Sometimes they're just cute little connections that happen when the right people cross paths, but to me they serve as a witness to the communion of saints. My friend Bro. Matt and I were among those standees in the vestibule along with another layman. Jerry was attending the Vigil Mass for the first time, and during the homily the name on a young man's name-tag happened to catch his attention. It reminded him of a Catholic classmate who had put her pro-life conviction into action, twenty years ago and six hundred miles away. While Barbara and Jerry attended the same college, she became an unwed mother through her boyfriend of the time and gave birth to Samuel. And here was little Samuel's name, first and last, hanging on the jacket of a young Knight of Columbus who was an usher for the pro-life Mass. He squatted down in front of us to help a young lady who had felt faint. When he stood up to go, his name tag jogged in Jerry's memory, and a couple of questions later, Samuel had confirmed that yes, he was Barbara's boy. Jerry took my pen and wrote on the usher's Mass program "Barbara-- Sam is looking good! -- Jerry...."

Well, there is one liturgy I'd like to see updated.

Hearing coverage of the anti-war protestors in Washington reminds me that they need some new slogans.

Hey, hey;
Ho, ho;
Mindless chanting has to go.

Can't they come up with something better than "Hey, hey; ho, ho; (fill in the blank) has got to go"? I mean: it's such a cliche'! And so avoidable: after all, these events attract the cream of today's artistes: makers of papier-mache street puppets, members of drumming troupes, and so many other creative types: why can't they come up with a few more original couplets to recite?

We're not hating, we're not ranting
we're not thinking, we're just chanting.

For some generally irreligious people, a political demonstration may be the most moving event they ever take part in, and the one which gives them the greatest feeling of solidarity with humanity. No wonder it takes on the character of a ritual whose basic texts become fixed with time.

And by the way, since I'm here in Washington for this week's March For Life: fortunately, pro-life crowds don't seem to chant slogans much; they prefer to sing hymns or say prayers together. Cardinal Law used to try to stir up the teens with "Give me an L: L!" and they'd politely shout along with him, at least to get it over with.

Another inspection mission underway

Thanks to John, Teresa, and Steve for their kind welcome at St. Mark's in Vienna (VA) Sunday morning and the breakfast afterward. It was worth the trip to hear Mrs. Schultz sing.

As you might expect from some of John's posts about music performance, his tempos are indeed up-tempo: not that there's anything wrong with that. John just prays faster than I do. It did work well for the chant-style Gloria which the parish choir sang from the RitualSong book, and if the result is good, you can call it "sprightly". Sometimes when I hear a church musician moving that fast, it sounds like a hurry, and I wonder "who stuck her with a cattleprod?"

Since one of the songs sung at Mass was Here I Am, Lord, this might be a good time to post Fr. James Buffer's amusing translation.

Deus maris et caeli
plorantes meos audivi
Habitans in tenebris
salvabitur
Stellas noctis qui feci
tenebras inlustrabo
Quis portabit meam lucem?
Iis mittam quem?

Ecce ego; sumne ille?
Te vocantem nocte audivi
Ibo, Domine, te ducente,
Gentem tuam corde tenebo.

(This is from memory, so pardon any errors.)

Word up from the WashTimes:

The Holy See will soon publish a new glossary of 90 words related to sexual and family issues, according to Cardinal Alfonso Lopez Trujillo, director of the Pontifical Council for the Family.

The "Lexicon of the Family and Life" will also clarify the Catholic Church's teachings on birth control, sex education, assisted procreation and homosexuality. The work intends to clarify "neologisms, ambiguous terms and difficult concepts in frequent use."

Those terms include "voluntary interruption of pregnancy," "reproductive health," "matrimonial indissolubility," "sexual education" and "conjugal love." When bandied about in a global forum, they can cause "grave moral confusion," the lexicon states.

The work has a waiting audience.

"It's long overdue, but it's a welcome initiative to clarify the political hijacking of the language," said William Donohue, president of the New York-based Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.

Sounds promising. The first step is calling things by their right names, eh?

Especially when you want an exorcism performed on you. This lady is protesting that Bp. Daniel Hart, of Norwich, wouldn't agree to have her exorcised when it was just so obvious that she needed it.

I'm surprised she's not suing: isn't everybody? It's another case of abuse that the bishops allowed to continue. Oh, man, the argument writes itself.

In the end, she got her demons expelled at a Protestant seminary. What shall we conclude?

Shall we say, then, that Protestants lacking apostolic authority can't expel real demons, and therefore she didn't have any? Given her continued antics, I have to figure she hasn't quite been restored to sanity yet.

Amy spotted this one: Unitarian leader proposes adding "God" to the association's statement of beliefs. This may be a radical move for the heart of liberal non-creedal religion in America.

I wonder if many of us American Catholics realize this, but some religious bodies are non-creedal: they not only have different beliefs from those the Catholic Church proclaims, but don't have any creed to which members must subscribe. Surprisingly, the various Baptist denominations are the foremost example of this, for they make the freedom of believers in Christ a principle, and traditionally impose no statement of faith other than what is contained in the words of Scripture.

A story is told about President Harry Truman, a Baptist; some prominent Baptist proposed censuring him after it became known that Mr. Truman sometimes drank liquor, but Truman responded reasonably enough that he and his co-religionists were not required to believe in abstaining.

In practice, this is not working out for some of the Baptist denominations, since they actually do believe in Christ, and when disputes arise, they end up formulating statements of belief, as for example, that of the SBC.

Teresita Anez carries a crucifix at the beginning of an oversized Catholic rosary during a religious march organized by the opposition in Caracas, Venezuela, Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2003.(AP Photo/Leslie Mazoch)

Typical. I didn't understand Greg's question! Well, he says. Anyway, at least he can focus in on it now.

He writes at HMS: "the incarnation raised God's relationship with humanity to a more intimate level for all time. I am asking, did God's coming as man raise his relationship to men to a more intimate level for all time? And if so, what is the significance of that intimacy and how does this intimacy not cause women to 'lose out' on something?"

There are some limits to this sort of direction: when we think about the change in status to humanity caused by the Incarnation and the Pasch, we have some Scriptural markers like St. Paul's "neither male nor female", and the theme that we are all "sons of God"; the NT doesn't call the men "sons" and the women "daughters".

So I think he's getting into some speculative territory.

But why not.

Greg Popcak, when not supervising the St. Blog's Institute for Nervous Patients, spends his time wondering about things. Today he wonders whether we can find any particular meaning in the fact that God became incarnate as a man rather than as a woman.

A 1999 article by Mark Brumley from The Catholic Faith confirms that the answer is yes. That meaning is to be found in the Christian understanding of human sexuality and in what Pope John Paul calls the "nuptial meaning of the human body". God created human sexuality to represent something about Himself.

To start with: fatherhood and motherhood, while complementary, are not the same in character. They're not quite parallel.

What is the difference between fatherhood and motherhood? A father is the “principle” or “source” of procreation in a way a mother is not. To be sure, both father and mother are parents of their offspring and in that sense both are causes of their offspring’s coming-to-be. But they are so in different ways.

Both mother and father are active agents of conception (contrary to what Aristotle thought). But the father, being male, initiates procreation; he enters and impregnates the woman, while the woman is entered and impregnated. There is an initiatory activity by the man and a receptive activity by the woman. Furthermore, modern biology tells us that the father determines the gender of the offspring (as Aristotle held, though for a different reason).

Thus, while father and mother are both parents of their offspring and both necessary for procreation, the father has a certain priority as the “source” or “principle” of procreation. (This “priority as source” is complemented by the mother’s priority as first nurturer, due to her procreating within herself and carrying the child within herself for nine months.)

This "initiatory" character of fatherhood is an earthly representation of God's initiatory role vis-a-vis ... everything else! Whether we speak of Christ and the Church, God and the soul, or God and the created world, God's initiative comes first. We can even find this masculine-feminine polarity of God and creation in a play on words: "material" = mater.

Even within the inner life of the Holy Trinity, the Father generates on his own initiative:

Again, we draw on the analogy of human fatherhood. As we have seen, a father is the “source” of his offspring in a way a mother is not. The First Person of the Trinity is the “source” of the second Person. Thus, we call the First Person “the Father” rather than “the Mother” and the Second Person, generated by the Father yet also the Image of the Father, we call the Son.

So yes, there is something iconic about bridegrooms and brides: a cosmic dance is going on.

Let's go see the Virgin Mary's image in a window right after we check out Jesus on the doughnut shop wall.

Now, if it were Krispy Kreme, I might believe it.

Sometimes the accusations are even anonymous:

The Rev. Edward McDonagh was removed from St. Ann's in West Bridgewater in May, two months after the archdiocese [of Boston] received a letter from a woman claiming her brother, a prostitute who died of AIDS, told her 20 years ago he'd been raped by McDonagh in the early 1960s. The family has not sued and McDonagh's lawyer, David Sorrenti, said he hasn't been told the identity of the accuser or his family.

''It makes it difficult to defend,'' he said.

In a letter to the archdiocese, Sorrenti said the allegation was ''an unsupported, unreliable, hearsay statement'' that wasn't worthy of belief.

Sorrenti said in an interview that the archdiocese, buried under civil suits from about 400 victims, is ''definitely taking the safe way out.''

The Times presents a statistical overview of the abuse scandal based on their survey of 4,268 cases.

• Half of the priests in the database were accused of molesting more than one minor, and 16 percent are suspected of having had five or more victims.


• Eighty percent of the priests were accused of molesting boys. The percentage is nearly the opposite for laypeople accused of abuse; their victims are mostly girls.


• While the majority of the priests were accused of molesting teenagers only, 43 percent were accused of molesting children 12 and younger. Experts in sexual disorders say the likeliest repeat offenders are those who abuse prepubescent children and boys.


• Those ordained in 1970 and 1975 included the highest percentage of priests accused of abuse: 3.3 percent. More known offenders were ordained in the 1970's than in any other decade.

One detail in the article connects 'Sixties dissent with a weakening of morals among the clergy:

Over all, 256 priests were reported to have abused minors in the 1960's. There were 537 in the 1970's and 510 in the 1980's, before a drop to 211 in the 1990's. The numbers do not prove that the upheaval in the church and society in the 1960's and 70's caused the abuse, but experts who reviewed The Times's research said it was important to consider the historical context in which the scandal occurred.

The church was jolted by two earthquakes in the 1960's. Vatican II was the first, and Humanae Vitae, the papal encyclical upholding the church's condemnation of artificial birth control in 1968, was the second.

Amid surging use of the birth control pill, many priests say it fell on them to promulgate a teaching they could not agree with. And many said the controversy removed their inhibitions about criticizing or even disregarding church teachings on sexuality.

"People were beginning to decide that the church couldn't make the rules anymore," Mr. Dinter said.

Hey, I didn't say it.

Isn't that the best headline you've seen this year?
(Thanks, Carol, for the link.)

A certain Hindu god wishes to make it known that henceforth he is to be known as Lord Krashna.

She reads VOTF's announcements and then checks up on them:

“Good afternoon. Voice of the Faithful™”
“Hiya. This is Kelly Clark from the Cathedral of the Holy Cross. How are ya?”
“How may I help you?”
“You guys came over to the church last Monday?”
“That’s correct.”
“Did you bring us any presents?”
“I beg your pardon?”
“On your web-site, you said you were bringing us presents.”
“One moment, please.”

Quickly, too.

Don't forget to drop in to Mark Sullivan's place today. His contribution to the latest threads on liturgical music includes some video of David Haas proving that contemporary liturgical renewal at its best sounds like a TV-show theme song.

Victor and Greg have been mixin' it up too on whether contemporary church music should be burned in a great bonfire or selectively, one piece at a time.

Bishop John B. McCormack admitted in a deposition that as a licensed social worker in Massachusetts in the 1980s he was obliged to report cases of child abuse, but claimed that in his personnel role in the archdiocese of Boston, he ``was acting as a delegate or as administrator for the archdiocese in its administration, so that I wasn't acting as a social worker.''

``I still carried the license of the commonwealth, but (allegations) came to me not as a social worker but as a priest. . . . I had no responsibility to (report),'' he said.

Apparently he didn't even have a responsibility to avoid lying to parents about Fr. Joseph Birmingham, a classmate of Bp. McCormack's, now accused of molesting 50 children.

McCormack acknowledged that in 1987, when the father of a 13-year-old altar boy serving with Birmingham wrote a letter asking whether Birmingham was the same priest who had previously been removed from another parish because of a sexual abuse allegation, McCormack replied, ''There is absolutely no factual basis to your concern.'' [Globe]

A few of my apologetics-minded friends were meeting the other day, on the occasion of a visit from Catholic lecturer Clayton Bower, and one of the guys joining them -- a little on the fringy side, just between you and me -- suggested that since the Vatican had come out against the ordination of men with homosexual tendencies, it raised a question about the validity of the sacraments conferred by such men if they were ordained.

Now, it's a good thing I wasn't there, or I'd have turned slowly toward him and raised one eyebrow.

Let's put the brakes on, guy, before you talk yourself into doubting the validity of some priest's ordination. First let's see what Cardinal Medina wrote. (The translation is Zenit's, and looks a little rough, but it's what we have available at the moment.)

The Congregation for Clergy has sent this Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments your Excellency's letter, asking us to clarify the possibility that men with homosexual tendencies be able to receive priestly ordination.

This Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, conscious of the experience resulting from many instructed causes for the purpose of obtaining dispensation from the obligations that derive from Holy Ordination, and after due consultation with the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, expresses its judgment as follows:

Ordination to the diaconate and the priesthood of homosexual men or men with homosexual tendencies is absolutely inadvisable and imprudent and, from the pastoral point of view, very risky. A homosexual person, or one with a homosexual tendency is not, therefore, fit to receive the sacrament of Holy Orders.

Let's notice what the Cardinal didn't say.

He didn't make a theological judgment about any invalidity of such ordinations, or even a clear canonical statement denying their liceity (that's their "licitness", for those of you from Rio Lindo).

Rather, he presented the Congregation's pastoral judgment that such men are unsuitable candidates for reasons of prudence.

Perhaps he stayed out of those other areas because they fall at least in part within the ambit of other dicasteries, doctrinal or canonical. Regulating the "discipline of the sacraments" doesn't make CDWDS the office to settle questions about the doctrine of the sacraments, and CDF didn't choose to make a statement about the question.

Or perhaps the Congregation decided it was appropriate merely to repeat the Vatican's previous judgment on the question, issued in the 1961 document Careful Selection and Training of Candidates for the States of Perfection and Sacred Orders:

Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers. [Source: CWN]

This statement too says nothing about invalidity, but merely imprudence, so anybody who's talking about invalidity in this case isn't supported by the documents.

This isn't the first time my fringy friend has come up with some theory that suggests widespread invalidity of the sacraments, and I can't help but think that such a mentality is itself a temptation to fall into schism.

"I used to be a very logical and rational person, a long way from any sort of religion," [Roh Moo-hyun] said, "But life is full of surprises and one day I found that I do believe that God exists and that he watches over humanity. Today I can state clearly that I believe in God and in his providence."

Italian priests in Albania on a mission of peacemaking get their passports stolen.

Newsday reports on a case of fraudulent accusation.

Sure, death and taxes are the two things you can count on. Sometimes you get both: for the Benedictine abbess St. Walburga, being dead doesn't exempt you from Germany's TV license fee.

"It is St. Joseph who cures. I am only his little dog."

Alfred (Brother André) Bessette served for 40 years as the porter at the Holy Cross brothers' school in Montreal, while he worked to build a shrine across the street in honor of St. Joseph. He even went so far as to leave St. Joseph's statue out in the rain until the Saint himself would provide the funds for a roof. St. Joseph came through.

Joshua Claybourn nominates CL and various other sites for a 2003 Bloggy. (blush, blush)

Let there be peace on earth
but please do not sing that song.
It isn't fit for Mass:
the style is completely wrong.

A broad schmaltzy anthem
in three-quarter time
with an oom-pah-pah rhythm
is not a work sublime.

Back in a summer camp
In '55 it began
It's not a sacred work
its focus is merely man.

It's well-intended,
but good intentions
don't make good liturgy.
In terra fiat pax
but don't sing that song at me.

The origin of the song is described at http://www.jan-leemusic.com/.