Author: Pete Vere

Fellow Catholic Light blogger Richard Chonak has just emailed me a copy of a curial document I did not know existed. This provides important and insightful commentary on the subject of musical concerts in Catholic churches. Thanks Rich! You can access this document here. Thanks Richard!

Marty Barrack emailed me yesterday with an interesting question. I thought I would answer it here since it is not an uncommon question that I have received in the past. Here it is: “[…] a musical concert, not a
[lost text]
addresses this question. This canon states: “In a sacred place only those things are to be permitted which serve to exercise or promote worship, piety and religion. Anything out of harmony with the holiness of the place is forbidden. The Ordinary may however, for individual cases, permit other uses, provided they are not contrary to the sacred character of the place.”

Okay, basically the Church sanctuary should only be used for sacred uses. Nevertheless, the Ordinary (meaning the Diocesan Bishop or his equivalent in law, the Vicar General, an Episcopal Vicar, or in the case of a religious house, the Major Superior) can permit other usages, provided it is not contrary to the sacred character of the place. These other uses should be the exception rather than the rule. The law doesn’t go into details about what is and is not contrary to the sacred character of the place; rather, the law relies on the common sense of the Ordinary. In other words, few would likely object to a classical music concert being performed in the Church sanctuary. On the other hand, a professional wrestling card, even if it is old school and thus within the bounds of decency, should probably be held in the Church hall.

Backstage with Bello and the Circus Sisters

This past weekend I was at the National Gathering of the Circus Traveling Show Ministries, which is basically organized under the USCCB’s office for ministry to migrant workers. While there I got to meet many of our chaplains who minister to circus professionals, carnival workers and the auto-racing industry. God permitting, I will be blog about it in the coming week.

In the meentime, I thought you might like to see the following picture of me backstage at the Ringling Bros. and Barnum and Bailey circus (red unit). I’m with one of the Little Sisters who travels with various circuses as part of her ministry, and with Bello the Clown who stars in the show.

Additionally, here’s a picture of me on the floor before the show. I’m with a couple of the clowns from the Ringling Bros. clown troupe.

New Contest!

Listening to the debate over Church music during the ChristMass holydays, I got an idea for a contest! Basically, write a parody about liturgists to the lyrics and tune of that most insipid of modern Christmas carols, Gramma Got Run Over by Reindeer.

Ian, a reader of CatholicLight, sent emailed me some great information concerning where Jewish worship derives its authority. In it, he writes:

I am by no means an expert, but I might be able to point you in some directions for further study regarding Judaism.

The period after the exile (586-536 roughly) is called Second Temple Judaism by the scholars. Biblically, the period is spelled out in historical detail in Ezra-Nehemiah, which is actually one book. The preeminant scholars in this field, Second Temple Judaism, are VanderKam at Notre Dame, J. Blekinsopp (sp?) also at ND, and J.J. Collins. I’m sure they would all be considered liberal, but they do make a good read.

In the little I have read I have found little importance given to the loss of the Ark. Rather after the exile, the post-exilic mentality shaped almost, if not all, aspect of Jewish life. The people were forever wondering: “Is the Exile
really over?” “If it is over why does God allow his people to be controled by the Gentiles?”, etc… Actually, it is only after the exile when we can speak of “Judaism.” Judaism is marked by Ezra-Nehemiah and by the almost constant control from outsiders, except for the brief period after the Maccabbees are victorious against the Greeks. However, it would also be untrue to speak of a monthelic Judaism even after the exile. Soon we find the Pharissees, Saduccees and the like. An important work in the regard is by E.P. Sanders of Duke called “Judaism: Practice and Belief”. A lot of ink as been spilled on this period.

Following the destruction of the Temple in c. 70 AD, Judaism collapses and the Pharissees end up taking the lead for subsequent generations. In the early 100’s AD the Jews suffered one monumental loss under – I can’t recall his name – to the
Romans and were never to return to Palestine really until the modern secular Jewish state was founded in the 1940’s. Following this period after the 100’s AD, the rabbis become central and their voluminous writitings take on an almost scripture like meaning. Together with the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings, the rabbis almost start to constitute an authority especially when the Jews were dispersed in the Gentile world. Like its ancient predecessor, modern Judaism is also far from monthelic in belief. Just here in the states we have Orthodox, Conservative and Reform Jews. The differences between each are dramatic and each, obviously, would claim that they are the authentic bearers of the Jewish message. For example, the Orthodox hold strictly to the Torah while the others might be more willing to compromise. So when we speak of Jews or Judaism who do we speak of?