Tuesday, May 13, 2014

The Harvard Controversy Wrap Up

In the end the atrocity planned for last night at Harvard didn't go on. The student organization that was to host the "Black Mass" thought better of it, or at least decided to move it off campus, but they couldn't find any one who would give them a room. Good for them, who ever they are. So, it was canceled. The New York "Satanist" group that was going to do the actual ritual sent out an email around 10:30pm saying that the ceremony was taking place at that very moment in a Chinese restaurant near by the campus. When a reporter called the place an employee identifying himself as Fred said that the principals involved were presently at the bar drinking and didn't appear to be performing any rituals (I'm not making this stuff up). Another report says that the ritual did go on on the second floor of the establishment, but without the consecrated host. 

My thoughts on all this.

johnnyc, who leaves comments now and again (something I strongly encourage, as long as they're not profane, and johnnyc's are always respectful, even if we may disagree), commented on an earlier post that we should be more concerned about dissent within the the Church as opposed to these "clowns." He points out the Leadership Confrence of Women Religious (LCWR), who have been under scrutiny by the Vatican and the USCCB for heterodox pronouncements, and a general disregard for Church doctrine and discipline. They are the ones, along with Catholic politicians who support abortion on demand, who should be the main focus of our concern, according to him. I agree that these satanist wannabees are clowns, but don't agree that we're misdirecting our fire upon them. Whatever the conflict between the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and the LCWR, it should not be happening in the New York Times. These internecine battles played out in the public square are the very definition of the Church at her most self-referential, and irrelevant.

The outrage expressed at the Harvard affair is not a reflection of fear, but was a teaching moment in which the Church engaged the world and educated it anew about the centrality of the Eucharist in our life, the True Presence and the beauty of Eucharistic Adoration. All the LCWR battle comes off as is more Church politics that few outside of a small group within the community is paying attention to. For those in the main stream media who cover it, it's just an extension of the same old liberal-conservative battles, and to the world the Church just ends up looking like a political organization.  I have faith that the Spirit will sort that situation out, one way or another, and I don't see the need to air our family business in public. But if we are going to make a strong public stand let it be in these moments of engagement with the world when we are given these opportunities to show what what the Church really stands for.

My other thought is that as a Church we really do need to examine how Holy Communion is distributed, specifically if Communion in the hand while standing is the most reverent, and safest, way of distributing the Sacred Body of Christ. The problem is that this is usually broken down into a "progressive-traditionalist" battle, and that's wrong. In our parish we have had problems of non consecrated hosts being stolen, and of people having to be instructed to consume the host after they tried to walk away with it. A couple of our ushers had an altercation with someone on Easter who refused to consume the host and ran away with it.

Let me go on record: I don't speak Latin (mine was a social promotion out of the class) and, while I'm not opposed to it, I have no desire to celebrate the Extraordinary Form. I'm Novus Ordo born and bread, and proud of it. I am troubled though by the disrespect showed to the Blessed Sacrament and believe that in this time of increased occult activity certain aspects of our practice needs to be reexamined, free of prejudice and agenda. If we really believe the Eucharist is what we say it is; the Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ under the appearance of bread; then we need to do all that we can to prevent such desecrations from happening.

1 comment:

johnnyc said...

Well Father I think we can agree on this. We both love Jesus Christ and His Church. In fact, I live in the Bible belt and when I am asked by protestants if I love Jesus that is my answer. It certainly promotes dialogue. :) Yes looking at my comments it does seem I am downplaying the events at Harvard. Not really my intention. I just wanted to make a point that if we really do believe that the bread becomes Jesus in the Catholic Mass then the outcry should be equal when dissidents inside the Church also profane the Eucharist. Sacrament means oath and our participation in the Sacraments given to us by Jesus demonstrate our continual renewed obedience to the oath of the New Covenant in Christ Jesus. I wonder if these people really understand that. It really hit home for me when I did a Letter of St. James Catholic Bible study and came across James 5:12. And if the excuse is that they love Jesus but disagree with Church teaching then they fail to understand that Jesus and His Church are One and the Same and they fall into the same error as protestants who profess to love Jesus but do not follow Him.

Anyway.....it was wonderful seeing the reaction of many people to the events at Harvard. Especially The Blessed Sacramemnt procession.....

http://www.newliturgicalmovement.org/2014/05/blessed-sacrament-procession-in.html#.U3OxS_ldXSs

A couple of good things we can take away from this whole incident.....satan knows who Jesus is so while these people were trying to insult they also provided a pretty good apology for the Real Presence. Also the Catholic response of reverence and peaceful prayer was fully on display.

Father, I attend both forms of the Mass and besides the issue you raised with CITH I have to say that the amount of people who show up late and leave early (to the point of leaving after just receiving Communion) in the OF as compared to the EF is striking. Actually it's been my experience that while I have seen some come in late at the EF rarely do you see anyone leave early and for the most part all stay for the Prayers after Low Mass. I am not going to venture as to why that is.....just an observation. On that note.....I wonder why the practice of saying the Prayers after Low Mass seemed to go away. Was this specifically called for or just individual choices of parish priests or Bishops? Thank you and I will keep you in prayer Father.