V
vontroster
Guest
Hey, the cannon doesn’t fire a live shot.
- Status
L
liturgyluver
Guest
The Sanctus bells are always rung in mass in London. I am amazed that this isn’t standard practice everywhere.
W
whipp711
Guest
The “Americanization” of the mass strikes me as lazy best practices by the priest and congregation. The rationalization of why they don’t ring the bells may be logical, but it just seems a further move away from what made mass so special. That’s just my humble opinion and perspective. Now insert the lawyer disclaimer here about “where applicable by law, not valid in Deleware, New Jersey, or Florida.”
M
minkymurph
Guest
They ring bells in my Parish at weekends. They don’t during the week.
C
centurionguard
Guest
Its nice to hear the Consecration Bells at any OF or EF Mass.
**The ringing of Church bells before and after Mass as with the Consecration calls to mind a powerful meditation from Thomas Merton on the meaning of Church bells:
Bells are meant to remind us that God alone is good, that we belong to Him, that we are not living for this world. They break in upon our cares in order to remind us that all things pass away and that our preoccupations are not important. They speak to us of our freedom, which responsibilities and transient cares make us forget.
They are the voice of our alliance with the God of heaven. They call us to peace with Him within ourselves…The bells say: we have spoken for centuries from the towers of great churches. We have spoken to the saints your fathers, in their land. We called them, as we call you, to sanctity.
What is the word with which we called them? We did not merely say, “Be good, come to church.” We did not merely say “Keep the commandments” but above all, “CHRIST IS RISEN. CHRIST IS RISEN!” And we said: “Come with us. God is good. Salvation is not hard. His love has made it easy!”**
**The ringing of Church bells before and after Mass as with the Consecration calls to mind a powerful meditation from Thomas Merton on the meaning of Church bells:
Bells are meant to remind us that God alone is good, that we belong to Him, that we are not living for this world. They break in upon our cares in order to remind us that all things pass away and that our preoccupations are not important. They speak to us of our freedom, which responsibilities and transient cares make us forget.
They are the voice of our alliance with the God of heaven. They call us to peace with Him within ourselves…The bells say: we have spoken for centuries from the towers of great churches. We have spoken to the saints your fathers, in their land. We called them, as we call you, to sanctity.
What is the word with which we called them? We did not merely say, “Be good, come to church.” We did not merely say “Keep the commandments” but above all, “CHRIST IS RISEN. CHRIST IS RISEN!” And we said: “Come with us. God is good. Salvation is not hard. His love has made it easy!”**
S
SmokeRing
Guest
There is no “bite.” But I think it’s absolutely terrible to suggest that economic considerations will keep any Catholic priest/parish/group in the world from having an inexpensive ($2-6.00) bell to ring at their Masses here in the 21st century should they desire such a bell. They might not desire a bell but that would not be a decision based on economics.
The Blessed Junipero Serra, OFM certainly recognized the importance of bells. He went to great lengths to procure bells for his missions, going so far as to move bells from the older Jesuit missions in the south to what is now California. Not only did each California Mission have inexpensive sanctus bells they also had expensive tower bells. In some cases a mission would begin with wooden tower bells.
I find it troubling that you are trying to create a linkage between the gift of a $2-6.00 bell and not having enough money to buy food. The world is not a zero sum game. When that inexpensive bell was gifted it did not come at the price of not having food and to even try to infer it did is just wrong.
My Holy Father is God, not St. Francis. I believe the ringing of the sanctus bells during the Mass makes a joyful sound to God (PS 98.6) A tiny voice of thanks, one of joy. This whole discussion reminds me of this passage:
Matthew 26:7-11 – " a woman came up to him with an alabaster flask of very expensive ointment, and she poured it on his head, as he sat at table. But when the disciples saw it, they were indignant, saying, “Why this waste? For this ointment might have been sold for a large sum, and given to the poor.” But Jesus, aware of this, said to them, “Why do you trouble the woman? For she has done a beautiful thing to me.”
If you had read much of what I posted, you would have noted that we’re Franciscans and that we have a different set of priorities. When these things are possible and doable, we gladly do them. When we believe that they are in conflict with poverty and that they would meet with disapproval from our Holy Father, we don’t do them.
I gave the best example in the world. Our Holy Father sold the missal, not once, but several times, to raise money to feed the poor. At one point, he actually gave a poor woman the missal and told her to sell it and keep the money.
We don’t operate out of the same point of view as you are operating. However, our point of view is as valuable as your own. It has been around for 800 years and is observed by 1.7 million men and women today in 114 countries. It has made significant contributions to the life of faith of the Church.
The issues, for us, are bigger than the bells. If the bells are present, that’s fine. If they are not, that’s fine too. As you said, the one friar happened to have a bell in his pocket. He had access to one. It makes sense that he would use it. Were I his superior I would have wondered why he didn’t use it, knowing that it was available. However, I’ve also been superior where it’s not available and I don’t worry about it. I worry about the reverence of the mass, the needs of the friars, the needs of the local poeople and I have appreciated whatever gifts people have sent us, even a $6 bell, if they happen to put on into a box.
Just so you know, there were times when we did not have $6 to eat. This is why I say that today’s Catholic needs to become familiar with the Church around the world and there is no reason not to do sin, because we have internet and other means that are inexpensive or free. As we become aware of their situtions, their customs, their prioritie, we tend to become more gentle and less dogmatic about things that were never dogmatic.
As Francis said, “At the end of our lives we shall be judged on how much we loved poverty.”
By the way, tonight begins the Solemnity of the Seraphic Father. Please pray for Franciscans around the world.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
S
SmokeRing
Guest
Why would you even post something like this? Did doing so somehow make you feel “good?”At my parish they ring bells, blast a cannon at the nearest prot denomination, and have a mariachi band strum a few chords.
J
JReducation
Guest
Unfortunately, that’s the economic reality of many places. Unless these things are donated from the outside, they cannot be purchased at the local level.
He did what many missionaries still do. He he begged and borrowed.
That is not what I said. I said that if all you have is a limited amount of funds and you have to buy bells or food, the choice is obvious. You have to buy food.
Have you ever belonged to a mendicant or monastic parish? Holy Father is the proper title for Benedict, Francis, and Dominic. It is also the proper title for the pope.
I think you may have not understood what I’m saying. Maybe I was not clear enough and for that, I am sorry.
Please pray for us during the solemnity (Oct 4).
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
S
SmokeRing
Guest
Unfortunately, that’s the economic reality of many places. Unless these things are donated from the outside, they cannot be purchased at the local level.
Not because a priest or a parish cannot ultimately raise the $3-6.00
He did what many missionaries still do. He he begged and borrowed.
Obviously he thought bells were mighty important.
That is not what I said. I said that if all you have is a limited amount of funds and you have to buy bells or food, the choice is obvious. You have to buy food.
That’s not the case here. You’re setting-up a situation that simply does not exist.
Br. JR, OSF
M
MissRose73
Guest
I certainly hope they will be rung in Manchester when I go to Mass there near the end of the year/beginning of the new year too…
C
Cavaille-Coll
Guest
The beauty of the Church, including its physical beauties like liturgy, music, bells, art, and so forth, elevate the hearts of the poor and help to give them spiritual riches. Keeping them in liturgical squalor is a form of abuse. Many of the Franciscans of the province where I live display aversion bordering on hatred of liturgical beauty and form, very much unlike St. Francis. It was the primary reason I never considered becoming a Franciscan.
C
Cavaille-Coll
Guest
T
TimothyH
Guest
I’f I’m faced with the choice of food or bells, I hope someone abuses me liturgically.
I’ll take four Cistercian monks saying mass at a wooden table and and then handing me a plate of rice afterward over the grandest Mass in the most elaborate cathedral and then being allowed to die of hunger in the street. In the former, I have met Christ twice. In the latter, perhaps once.
It’s a sin to sit and play the pipe organ if people are outside the Church dying of starvation.
-Tim-
P
paperwight66
Guest
They certainly will be, as they are definitely rung in Liverpool, and what Liverpool does today, Manchester does tomorrow (sorry, a joke to wind up any Mancunians who might be lurking, as there’s traditional rivalry between the two cities).
J
JReducation
Guest
Bold is mine
I think we have to be very careful. The avoidance of something is not necessarily hatred. Franciscans inherited an austerity from our Holy Father. Since the beginning of the order there were some things that were very clear in the mind of Francis that he handed down to the order.
First, Francis did not see the order as a clerical order. It was always an order of brothers. Many priests joined the order to become brothers. There was always a desire to simplify the celebration of the mass so as not to singularize the ordained friars.
Second, there was the issue of poverty. The mass was to be reverent and celebrated with great love, but without violating poverty. Francis asked Pope Innocent for a missal that was simpler than the missal being used in his diocese at the time. The friars tweaked it to simplify it even more. Francis prohibited the use of Gregorian chant at mass and in the LOTH. The LOTH was to be recited. He wrote Italian laudas that were sung at the mass. He simplified the chapels . . . as simple as they could be for those times. They were pretty simple already. He even wrote into the rule that if there are more than one priest in a house, only one can celebrate mass. There is no private mass without the permission of the Guardian.
Third, Francis introduced elements into the mass that were not familiar to the people of the time and are not familiar to most people today: pageants at mass, exchange between the congregation and the celebrant instead of the priest sub vocalizing, he even introduced animals at mass, which was rather interesting. He was the man who introduced the living nativity to Midnight Mass. They had real animals at that mass. Later he introduced the blessing of the animals at mass. He introduced the living passion which became very popular at many Palm Sunday masses.
Fourth, he handed down to his friars a command to keep worship reverent, but simple.
What you may interpret as hatred may simply be an attempt on the part of the friars to preserve the simplicity and austerity that they were commanded to observe in the mass. While the Benedictine tradition, which is more widely known, is very beautiful and even ornate, the Franciscan form is very austere. It was always bare bones.
There was a problem between Vatican I and Vatican II. Many bishops invited the friars to take over parishes. This meant that friars had to be ordained. This was the first problem, too many priests in the order. Diocesan priests who only knew the Benedictine beauty and form often trained these priests. These friar priests went along with this, because it’s what they were taught.
When the General Chapter of 1970 rolls around, the Church tells the friars that they are to go back to the 13th century, restore their infrastructure and way of worship. Bl. John Paul made it a point of insisting that these simple forms of life and worship were necessary for the Church and that the friars should not forget them, but should bring them forward from the past to the present. What may appear as a resistance is really a fidelity to the mind of the founder and to his wishes. It must also be understood that when a bishop invites a religious order to take over a parish, he agrees, on behalf of his people, that the people of that parish will accommodate to the spirituality and manner of that religious community and will support that community. No community can take over a parish, if the parishioners and the religious are going to be in a perpetual conflict. It won’t work.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
A
anp1215
Guest
Excellent post.
J
JReducation
Guest
People like St. Francis, St. Vincent de Paul, St. John Bosco and Bl. Mother Teresa were clear on this. Many of us forget these wonderful teachers.
We forget such events as I have posted twice that Francis actually gave away the missal to be sold for food for the poor. They went without mass, unless they could walk to a church, which was several miles away.
St. John Bosco’s vestments and altar linens were threadbare. The chapel of his first oratory was a whitewashed room in a home, with none of the trimmings of a beautiful church or chapel. He took his money and spent it on his boys. He would later assign a lay brother to direct the oratory, because the brother, not being a priest, was not swayed by the clericalism of the time. He kept the priests under check and kept them simple as well as their chapels and everthing that they used for the mass.
St. Vincent de Paul packed mass kits for the Lazarists (today known as the Vincentians). They certainly could not carry much in those kits. They were to go out to the poor where there were no churches or chapels and start from scratch. The Daughters of Charity do not live in convents. They never have; therefore, they never had the beautiful chapels. They have the motherhouses, which are beautiful. But the community houses were just houses in neighborhoods. So their chapels were very simply and austere. You didn’t find great organ in them or anything that was very expensive.
Bl. Mother Teresa’s chapels are bare. There is usually a crucifix with a sign next to it that says, “I Thirst”. There is a tabernacle and a very simple altar and maybe a statue of the Blessed Mother that someone may have donated. They don’t make it a practice of spending money on chapels, chapel furniture or church supplies. They don’t even have seating. In some of their houses, the chapel doubles as the dormitory. You may find mats rolled and neatly lined against the wall. These are rolled out at night to sleep.
We have a wide array of wonderful traditions and spiritualities that have influenced our liturgical life. I have alwasy said, “Catholicism is Catholic, not European or Benedictine.” Catholics around the world have to look around and discover the wealth of traditions in our Church.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
Jim_Roberts
Guest
They did this form of act whenj it was said in Latin. But the reakl meaning for this ias that the churches were so largre AND THE PEOPLE COULND’T SEE, SO WHENE THE BELLS WOULD RING IT MEANT THAT THE CONSECRATION WAS BEING TAKEN.
JESUS I TRUST IN YOU
jr
C
Cavaille-Coll
Guest
I must say that your humble and charitable answer to my rather unfriendly assault is humbling to me, and I apologize for my part. You demonstrate the true spirit of St. Francis on this, his feast day. Thank you and God bless you.Bold is mine
I think we have to be very careful. The avoidance of something is not necessarily hatred. Franciscans inherited an austerity from our Holy Father. is, because it’s what they were taught.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
JReducation
Guest
You’re welcome. St. Francis and his sons and daughters have always been an enigma, but especially today. I think it’s because for most people the recovery of the glory of the mass means the ornate, solemn and very well choreographed Tridentine Form.
For Franciscans, recovery is not the Tridentine Form. That was never our form. For us, recovery is a simple altar, with a crucifix, tabernacle on a pedestal behind it (our altars were never attached to the wall), no Gregorian chant, but beautiful hymns in whatever language is available (Latin, German, English, etc), very simple buildings with minimal decorations, statues, and furniture. Though I have to say that frescos are very much a part of Franciscan tradition. Francis liked them and he also liked icons. The Franciscans of the Immaculate have permission to use the Tridentine Form.
We had gotten away from that simplicity, because the Church wanted our friars to help run parishes. When we sent friars to train, diocesan priests often did the training. They trained them according to what they knew. By Vatican II, it became obvious that this was not working. We had several hundred years of this and we had become clericalized and very Benedictine.
Pope Paul VI asked the friars to revisit their constitutions and see if they reflected the rule and admonitions of St.Francis. The work took about five years. In 1970,the first draft of the new constitutions were published ad experimentum. By 1978, it was evident that these constitutions did not work. They had tried to write a commentary for each chapter of the rule, but they did not tell the friars what to do. The new constitution was more of a theological document than a legal document.
In 1980, Pope John Paul called in the Ministers’ General of the different branches of the order and directed them to rewrite the constitutions. This time, they had to fill in the blanks to answer those questions that Francis had not answered in the rule. There were many things that happened after Francis died. But they were not to change what Francis wrote in the rule. The answers to new situations, which were to be written into constitutions, had to fit the mindset and worldview of Francis. This required a lot of work. By the mid 80s the new constitutions were ready for His Holiness’ approval. They were approved. The next thing was to implement them. This has taken since about 1986 to today. We’ve had to change our infrastructure from a priestly focus to a fraternal focus. We’re no longer a community of priests, but a fraternity that has priests and brothers who are equal and indistinguishable, even at mass.
We are don’t celebrate mass like others do. We preserve the reverence, while also preserving austerity in all things. If you watch a mass on EWTN you’ll notice that it’s a blend of many things. You hear Latin and English. You see several friars around the altar, but only one friar celebrating. The other friars who are priests may not celebrate mass without the permission of the Minister. You’ll notice that they do not have a communion rail, because it separates the laity from the priest. In reality, the idea is not to separate the ordained friar from the non ordained friar. If they had a larger sanctuary, they would have all the friars in the sanctuary. Since they have a rather small one, they simple don’t have the railing. The friars sit on the front, very close to the altar, without being in the priest’s way.
You’ll notice that they don’t use Gregorian chant, but they do use different kinds of sacred music and their chant is very simple. It has to be kept as minimal as possible, just enough to add a some reverence, but not so much that the friars sound like monks.
It’s also important to the friars to always ask themselves, “Would this be agreeable to our Holy Father?” Franciscans have a very strong love affair with their founder. He’s more than a founder. He is Father. He is the perfect Christian, the man who lived like Christ and became the reflection of Christ.
In the mass of October 4, the Church prays, “Heavenly Father, you exalted our Holy Father to the perfection of the evangelical counsels . . .” In the collect, we pray, “Father, through your grace our Holy Father Francis became the perfect Christian . . .” If we believe that the Church teaches as she prays, then it is understandable why Franciscans would be horrified at the thought of doing something that Francis would not do or something that he prohibited. The aspiration of every Franciscan is to be a mirror of perfection as was our Holy Father.
As I said at the beginning, we’re confusing to most people. Our tradition is a little older than what most people call tradition. For most people, liturgical tradition means going back to Trent. To the Franciscan it means going back to Assisi in the 13th century. It’s not about duplicating the rituals, but about observing the wishes of Francis, because Francis wrote in his final testament that no one showed him what to do, but everything that he wrote for his sons and daughters was a direct revelation from Christ himself. The Church does not want anyone tampering with this. That being said, Francis did not write about every possibility. Over 800 years, many things happened that he never foresaw. The friars have had to fill in the blanks by speculating what he would want us to do. That’s how you get the 114 Franciscan branches.
I truly believe that we have to learn about all of these rich traditions: Benedictine, Franciscan, Carmelite, Jesuit, MCs, Vincentian, Salesian,etc etc.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
- Status