Kennedy Funeral (The Mass Itself)

[JReducation]

But, even the Masses celebrated by the Franciscans on EWTN manage to maintain fidelity to the norms.

I would hope that our friars try the best they can to follow the rubrics.

The point that I am trying to make is that since this particular Mass was televised, every effort should have been made so as to ensure that the rubrics and norms were properly followed. That was, unfortunately, not the case with this particular Mass. In fact, as I see it, they played fast and loose with the rubrics.

Not having seen the entire mass, just the beginning, I have to take the word of those who saw it. You certainly have always impressed me as a credible reporter. Soi I take your word for it that something went wrong. You don’t have to persuade me on that score.

There are those of us who find it rather painful when liturgical abuse occurs, especially when it’s on a grand scale as what played out yesterday. By grand scale, I mean that it was aired in several miillion homes. The Church certainly lost an opportunity to catechize the viewers and expose them to the richness of her Sacred Liturgy.

That may be so as well. But at this point it’s over. The best that can be done is to examine what went wrong and plan for the future. What I see happening on this thread and others is the repetition of the same point over and over again, as if that were going to fix that particular situation. At some point we must make the statement and let it stand, then return to our mission and life of contemplation.

With regard to the joy of the Resurrection, we seem to also lose the prespective that we also need to pray for the repose of the soul of the deceased. It was rather ironic that the family chose the first reading from the book of Wisdom since it indirectly references Purgatory. We tend to forget that for many of us, this will be one major stop before we enter into the joys of the heavenly kingdom. That is why it is very important to pray for the repose of the souls of the dead.

I agree with you. The requiem mass or Mass of the Resurrection should meet three needs: prayer for the repose of the deceased, prayer for the consolation of the living, and prayer in anticipation of the resurrection.

This is what should have been indicated in the General Intercessions where we plead for God’s mercy on the soul of the deceased. It was not the time to extol him through his speeches and pray for causes that are not quite compatible with the Church.

I have written General Intercessions for many of our diocesan Masses. I have always been careful what to write, even more vigilant over what I say than, evidently, the tawdry, politicized stuff from OCP. The family should have received better guidance than what they got.

We don’t know what guidance they received. We don’t know what the rationale was in the mind of the person who planned the liturgy. The best that we can say is for the future . . . .

The key to a healthy spiritual life is to observe the law, but not allow the law to take up so much of our time and concern that we have little thought for prayer and a life of poverty. A healthy observance of the law can build the spirit. An emotional attachment to the law can deprive the spirit of the silence and poverty necessary to contemplate the author of the law, Jesus Christ.

Therefore, my counsel is the same as always. See what is right and hold on to it. See what is wrong and learn from it. But in the end, do not forget that only Lady Poverty will build up the soul and make it worthy of God’s grace. If we attempt to own the law, then we will not be truly poor. The liturgy is meant to lead us to the total detachment of the soul from its desires, its wants, its prejudices, its will, even its attachment to the law, so that stripped of everything that is temporal, the soul becomes an open tomb ready and waiting for the poor and crucified Christ in the sacrifice of the mass in anticipation of the resurrection.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

Even atheists and agnostics must understand that in order to function properly, any organization must have rules or chaos will soon follow!

The Senate has rules, so does Baseball. When Lou Gehrig died, the Yankees didn’t get 4 outs per inning for the rest of the season, it would have been disruptive.

Do you realize that this is a Catholic Forum set up expressly for discussing Liturgy and Sacraments?

As an agnostic, you apparently do not understand that the Funeral Mass “is to commend the soul to God’s mercy, to anticipate the hope of the resurrection and to pray for the consolation of the living” as BR. JR, OSF indicated, not to eulogize the deceased, that is done in a separate ceremony outside of Holy Mass.

While i strongly disagree with anyone who supports the grave evil of abortion, i prayed for Sen. Kennedy’s soul and agree with most of the posters here who prayed for the repose of Ted Kennedy’s soul!!!

We are instructed by God through His Sacred Scriptures; **“I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: preach the word, be urgent in season and out of season, convince, rebuke, and exhort, be unfailing in patience and in teaching.” (**2 Tim 4:1-2)

Preaching the word does not make someone a “faker”, that term only applies to those who do not preach the Word of God!

Sancta Maria, Mater Dei, Ora Pro Nobis Peccatoribus!

mark

HI Mark, i was wondering what does the church teach on suicide? I know what they use to teach but I don’t know if it has changed.Also as you were saying: Jesus is to judge the living and the dead, not you , me, or the church. Why is it that I feel Cathoilcs do judge people and i get very confused as i am just back for 4 months and it has been a while and i am trying to understand so be easy on me and Thank You Love of Christ Nancy

 

[JReducation]

HI Mark, i was wondering what does the church teach on suicide? I know what they use to teach but I don’t know if it has changed.Also as you were saying: Jesus is to judge the living and the dead, not you , me, or the church. Why is it that I feel Cathoilcs do judge people and i get very confused as i am just back for 4 months and it has been a while and i am trying to understand so be easy on me and Thank You Love of Christ Nancy

A good Catholic judges actions, not individuals. We do not know what is in the heart of a person. We can see if an action is good or evil. But we cannot see if a heart is good or evil. Any Catholic who attempts to make such a judgment brings judgment on himself or herself.

Catholics are not the only ones who judge invidiuals. There are many people of many faiths who have appointed themselves lawyer, jury and judge over others.

As to suicide, the objective teaching of the Church has not changed. It is a grave sin to take one’s life. That being said, today we know more about those who commit suicide than we did in the past. It is highly doubtful whether a person who takes his or her own life is mentally healthy and has full control of his choices.

For someone to be personally (subjectively) guilty of grave sin he must know and believe that the action is sinful. Many depressed people seriously believe that taking themselves out of this world is a better thing for them and for others. Right there, their judgment is impaired.

For someone to be personally guilty of grave sin he or she must have the freedom to choose. Many people with this degree of depression have hit a level of functioning where they are acting on pure emotion rather than reason. Emotions do not have a good break system. Right there you have a situation where a person’s freedom to stop himself can be called into question.

Objectively, suicide is a grave sin. Subjectivesly, most people who commit suicide are probably very ill. This may even include some of these folks who volunteer for suicide missions, such as terrorists and religious fanatics. Some of their behavior makes one wonder if they are really well wrapped.

I hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[nancy_dalrymple]

A good Catholic judges actions, not individuals. We do not know what is in the heart of a person. We can see if an action is good or evil. But we cannot see if a heart is good or evil. Any Catholic who attempts to make such a judgment brings judgment on himself or herself.

Catholics are not the only ones who judge invidiuals. There are many people of many faiths who have appointed themselves lawyer, jury and judge over others.

As to suicide, the objective teaching of the Church has not changed. It is a grave sin to take one’s life. That being said, today we know more about those who commit suicide than we did in the past. It is highly doubtful whether a person who takes his or her own life is mentally healthy and has full control of his choices.

For someone to be personally (subjectively) guilty of grave sin he must know and believe that the action is sinful. Many depressed people seriously believe that taking themselves out of this world is a better thing for them and for others. Right there, their judgment is impaired.

For someone to be personally guilty of grave sin he or she must have the freedom to choose. Many people with this degree of depression have hit a level of functioning where they are acting on pure emotion rather than reason. Emotions do not have a good break system. Right there you have a situation where a person’s freedom to stop himself can be called into question.

Objectively, suicide is a grave sin. Subjectivesly, most people who commit suicide are probably very ill. This may even include some of these folks who volunteer for suicide missions, such as terrorists and religious fanatics. Some of their behavior makes one wonder if they are really well wrapped.

I hope this helps.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Well Br. JR,OSF, I want to thank you for taking the time to explain this to me, yes we have come a long way and we understand alot more about mental illness. Your answers come from a person who is very well educated in this field, and know’s what he is talking about. I think the terrorists are proberly a little differnt in the fact that they take hard drugs , and were bought up with these drugs from very young. And of course their beliefs are very strong to their god also. I guess it resembles the same in the fact that their judgement is also impaired, as far as practicing Catholic’s they should know better and still it does happen, because of thier illness. As far as MR. Kennedy goes I thought he got quite the send off . Just as a president would. I guess you must have noticed this? I think the church should not have made such a big deal because it did look like the church was giving it’s approval to the way of life it teaches against. I don’t know to much about it but I have been listening to alot of Catholic sites who disapproved’ of the way the church handled it. It was a royal send off, and I felt bad for the famliy but I know we should not compromise either. God Bless Nancy

 

[JReducation]

Well Br. JR,OSF, I want to thank you for taking the time to explain this to me, yes we have come a long way and we understand alot more about mental illness. Your answers come from a person who is very well educated in this field, and know’s what he is talking about. I think the terrorists are proberly a little differnt in the fact that they take hard drugs , and were bought up with these drugs from very young. And of course their beliefs are very strong to their god also. I guess it resembles the same in the fact that their judgement is also impaired, as far as practicing Catholic’s they should know better and still it does happen, because of thier illness. As far as MR. Kennedy goes I thought he got quite the send off . Just as a president would. I guess you must have noticed this? I think the church should not have made such a big deal because it did look like the church was giving it’s approval to the way of life it teaches against. I don’t know to much about it but I have been listening to alot of Catholic sites who disapproved’ of the way the church handled it. It was a royal send off, and I felt bad for the famliy but I know we should not compromise either. God Bless Nancy

Thank you. As far as Senator Kennedy’s send-off, I was reminded by my superior of something that St. Francis wrote for us to follow.

To the servant of God nothing should be displeasing save sin. And no matter in what way any one may sin, if the servant of God is troubled or angered—except this be through charity—he treasures up guilt to himself. 2 The servant of God who does not trouble himself or get angry about anything lives uprightly and without sin.

The point is that one should never be seduced by bad example. Sometimes, we can be seduced to immitate bad example. Other times we can be seduced to complain, moan, whine, and get angry or upset by bad example. Francis felt that both immitating bad example and allowing bad example trigger a reaction in us was wrong, because it takes away from the peace that we should be looking for in silence, contemplation, poverty, community, prayer, and penance. If one single act or event has this much power over your spiritual life, then you are in serious trouble. You have more troubles than the person who committed the transgressions. Not only are you being sucked in by the transgression, but you are in violation of what you promised to obey until the day you die, “to live the Gospel in the manner that St. Francis teaches and to obey or surrender your immortal soul to the fires of hell.”

I don’t think I want to go that way.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[benedictgal]

As far as MR. Kennedy goes I thought he got quite the send off . Just as a president would. I guess you must have noticed this? I think the church should not have made such a big deal because it did look like the church was giving it’s approval to the way of life it teaches against. I don’t know to much about it but I have been listening to alot of Catholic sites who disapproved’ of the way the church handled it. It was a royal send off, and I felt bad for the famliy but I know we should not compromise either. God Bless Nancy

Sen. Ted Kennedy’s funeral was extremely problematic because the rubrics were not followed. I saw the entire Mass as it aired live on ABC. Unfortunately, the laxity in following the norms, in my opinion, gave folks the wrong idea of what a Catholic funeral is supposed to be like. The readings are not supposed to be proclaimed from pieces of paper, but, rather, from the Lectionary. Per the GIRM, eulogies are not allowed. The words spoken by the homilist were a eulogy masking as a homily. The General Intercessions were not based on what is used for the Funeral Mass (prayers for the deceased); rather, they extolled the deceased’s political agenda as they were based on his speeches. The parts of the Mass, especially those acclamations that belong to the first order (Sanctus, Memorial, Great Amen) are to be sung and these were not. The Memorial Acclamation was blatantly omitted (no one, not even the celebrant, has the authority to edit the Mass as he sees fit).

 

[StrawberryJam]

Thank you for pointing out this is all about Liturgy, and Sacraments.
We all know the catholic church teaches that the Eucharist is the biggie of them all.
We also know, that Kennedy had the Holy Unction, and by whatever name you now call it, Last Rites. That is still a sacrament?

Speculation of his disposition lies not with the casual observer.

How many letters have any of you all had hand delivered to the Pope by a president?

And, remember who he received first Holy Communion from.

Is it jealousy that I see here? Wishing you had had a pope give you your first holy communion?

 

[benedictgal]

Thank you for pointing out this is all about Liturgy, and Sacraments.
We all know the catholic church teaches that the Eucharist is the biggie of them all.
We also know, that Kennedy had the Holy Unction, and by whatever name you now call it, Last Rites. That is still a sacrament?

Speculation of his disposition lies not with the casual observer.

How many letters have any of you all had hand delivered to the Pope by a president?

And, remember who he received first Holy Communion from.

Is it jealousy that I see here? Wishing you had had a pope give you your first holy communion?

There is no need for sarcasm here, nor should there be disrespect in referring to our Sacraments in such a flippant manner.

This thread is specifically about the Mass itself, not the late senator’s spiritual circumstances. You are more than welcome to have a mature and enlightening discussion about this subject. All that I ask is that you check the sarcasm and disrespect at the door.

As I stated in my previous post, the Mass itself was not the ideal, not by a longshot. There was a plethora of liturgical abuses. Redemptionis Sacramentum, the document promulgated by the Holy See concerning liturgical abuse specifically states that every Catholic has the right to a Mass that is free from abuse. This includes the deceased and his right to a properly celebrated funeral Mass. The Mass is not anyone’s personal property to do with as he pleases. No one, not even the celebrant, has the right to edit any part of the Mass.

I would make the same statements whether it was for Senator Edward M. Kennedy or Ed Moore from the parish. Senator or pauper, the deceased should have had a funeral Mass celebrated according to the norms and rubrics of the Catholic Church.

 

[PacoG]

After reading this thread, I am going to start praying that the Extraordinary Form replaces the Ordinary Form. (And I am saying this as someone who has never attended an EF mass.)

I am so tired of this cottage industry of amateur liturgists (or as Fr. Levis refers to them, liturgiologists) picking apart everything. A return to the EF would put all of you out of your hobby.

 

[benedictgal]

After reading this thread, I am going to start praying that the Extraordinary Form replaces the Ordinary Form. (And I am saying this as someone who has never attended an EF mass.)

I am so tired of this cottage industry of amateur liturgists (or as Fr. Levis refers to them, liturgiologists) picking apart everything. A return to the EF would put all of you out of your hobby.

Paco, I love you dearly. You are my friend and fellow Longhorn. I would never tell you how to practice law (although, I have had the privilege of writing a few myself). But, just how many liturgies have **you /B] planned? When I write my posts, I speak from experience. Sadly, the first Mass that I ever planned was the funeral Mass for my mom. Luckily, at my old Austin parish, the first thing they did to the newbie liturgy committee members was to have us read through the entire Sacramentary and GIRM and to familiarize ourselves with the Lectionary. Little did I know that in under a year, this would serve me well.

When I was asked to plan the liturgies at the Cathedral and for the diocese, it was just my rector and myself. He had me learn the Nuptial, Funeral and Quince Anos liturgies by heart so that we could ensure that each would be properly celebrated.

No. I do not have a degree in liturgy. But, I have had enough hard knocks on the head to know what I am doing. Based on my experience and from what I have learned and read in the authoritative documents of the Holy See, I would say that the senator got cheated out of a properly celebrated funeral Mass.**

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

The readings are not supposed to be proclaimed from pieces of paper, but, rather, from the Lectionary.

I hate it when people read from pieces of paper, but almost every time they pull it out of their back pocket. Oh well.

Per the GIRM, eulogies are not allowed. The words spoken by the homilist were a eulogy masking as a homily.

I missed the homily, but its not uncommon to remark about some aspect of a person’s life during a homily.
As for the euologies at the end, if I remember correctly, the Order of Funerals does allow for family to briefly speak about the person’s faith life.

The General Intercessions were not based on what is used for the Funeral Mass (prayers for the deceased); rather, they extolled the deceased’s political agenda as they were based on his speeches.

This I agree 100% on. It seemed more about politics than faith.

The parts of the Mass, especially those acclamations that belong to the first order (Sanctus, Memorial, Great Amen) are to be sung and these were not.

Oh well, not exactly the end of the world there.

The Memorial Acclamation was blatantly omitted (no one, not even the celebrant, has the authority to edit the Mass as he sees fit).

Maybe it wasn’t purposely omited but just forgotten by a nervous priest.

 

[pnewton]

I missed the homily, but its not uncommon to remark about some aspect of a person’s life during a homily.
As for the euologies at the end, if I remember correctly, the Order of Funerals does allow for family to briefly speak about the person’s faith life.

This has been quoted several times, but I don’t think this has been linked:

382. At the Funeral Mass there should, as a rule, be a short homily, but never a eulogy of any kind.

usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter8.shtml

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

This has been quoted several times, but I don’t think this has been linked:

382. At the Funeral Mass there should, as a rule, be a short homily, but never a eulogy of any kind.

usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter8.shtml

Yes, but as Order of Christian Funerals states that following the prayer after communion “a friend or member of the family may speak in rememberance of the deceased before the final commendation begins” (OCF 170).

And regarding the homily, the diocese of Sante Fe points out:

The OCF is very clear that “a brief homily should be given at the
funeral liturgy, but never any kind of eulogy” to replace the
homily (OCF, 141). This does not mean that the deceased cannot
be spoken about in the homily, but that the Word of God must be
primary.
archdiocesesantafe.org/Offices/Worship/Institute/Funerals.pdf

 

[JReducation]

I don’t even understand why this part is even being made a discussion point. I have served in five dioceses and three countries and I have never seen a funeral mass where the deceased was not mentioned in the homily and even “eulogized” in some way or another. Maybe the fault lies with the instructions. The difference between a eulogy and making remarks about the deceased is not clear where the line is.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[pnewton]

Was the emphasis during this Mass the Gospel and our the hope we have in our faith, or what a great man Kennedy was?

 

[Mattapoisett64]

Was the emphasis during this Mass the Gospel and our the hope we have in our faith, or what a great man Kennedy was?

To my way of thinking, the emphasis was on St. Edward of Hyannisport, but maybe that’s just me.

 

[bpbasilphx]

\ The Psalm was also not sung and the Alleluia was omitted.\

**I believe that there has never been an Alleluia (either pre or post V2) at a funeral mass.

---

**

//How is it possible for a person who is NOT in communion with the Catholic Church (one who has been married, divorced, and remarried) to have a televised funeral Mass?\

Like it or not, Edward Kennedy’s first marriage was annulled–that is, declard void ab initio, therefore he was entitled to remarry in the Church, and was in communion with the Catholic Church when he died, contrary to what you might think.

Remember that a funeral mass is NOT an award bestowed by the Church or a canonization, but the Church pleading for God’s mercy upon a departed sinner.

 

[pnewton]

To my way of thinking, the emphasis was on St. Edward of Hyannisport, but maybe that’s just me.

Therein lies the danger of eulogizing. It is too easy to fade off into a de facto canonization. We must not mislead the way to heaven as being so broad as to negate the existence of Hell. Souls could be lost over this point.

 

[zab]

Was the emphasis during this Mass the Gospel and our the hope we have in our faith, or what a great man Kennedy was?

I only watched video exerpts, but the funeral seemed to be better than I had feared it would be. Like others, I was disappointed with the Prayers of the Faithful. But I did not see any other parts of the Mass. However, I choose to be more concerned with the man’s soul than critical of any liturgical abuses. I thought the priest did a good job with the homily and even though it seemed more like a eulogy, he did link it to the gospel of Matthew. I especially was appreciative of his final remark which was as follows:
* **As one lives more toward the final moments of life, the public character fades and the deeper personal convictions and commitments which have sustained a person through a long and complex life come to occupy the center stage. This was the case in the last few weeks and months as Ted and Vickie together faced the last measure of his life. ***
*** Like any priest would be, I was present for them and with them. The faith which has sustained a visible historical presence now became the faith which teaches us how to see this life in light of the next life. The gift of the Eucharist which Jesus promised would nourish us and would carry us to eternal life became a source of even greater strength and comfort for Ted and Vickie. As the end approached, the conviction that sustained Senator Ted Kennedy through so many public struggles became the source of quiet confidence in a truth taught by his church at the Second Vatican Council in these words, “We do not know the time for the consumation of the earth and of humanity, but we are taught that God is preparing a new dwelling place and a new earth where justice will abide and where blessedness will answer and surpass all the longings for peace which spring up in the human heart.” ***

Today, at the Holy Eucharist, we pray we are confident that Ted Kennedy has entered this new dwelling of God. For as the Liturgy today inspires us, "Lord, for your faithful people, life has changed not ended. When the body of our earthly dwelling lies in death, we gain an everlasting dwelling place in heaven."
9:03 youtube.com/watch?v=eg4Kfro4OOk

 

[ProVobis]

But, just how many liturgies have **you /B] planned? **

I didn’t know we had a liturgy that anyone can “plan.” Certainly the EF is never referred to as being planned. It’s right there in the Missal. You can, however, plan some of the music.