Praxiteles
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Lawyer!
Here is a little note I came across illustrating a bugia or palmatoria used for Pontifical Masses. As you can see, it closely resembles the one used in Cobh last Tuesday – although I did not have the opportunity to inspect the one used in Cobh, I suspect that it was one given by the parish of Lemlara to Bishop Ahern in 1957 to commemorate his consecration (he came from that parish). If so, then it was made by WIlliam Egan of Cork and is a rather fine example of their late celtic revival silver work.
@ake wrote:
I only hope for a day when the seventh candlestick shall be our greatest concern.
I thoroughly agree with that sentiment.
@johnglas wrote:
rhabanus: I thought we were supposed to be beyond this: my answer to Prax did contain the phrase ‘you cannot be too prescriptive’ which is not doctrinaire. Since your post contained no direct reference to my post, I can conclude that the quote was only to make a snide point, which is a dishonourable form of ‘argument’.Your comment as usual floundered in erudite obscurity.
If yuo are referring tot he question of the seventh candle, then I would not agree with Jonglas that we are dealing with erudite obscurity. It was prescribed by the Council of Trent and denotes jurisdiction.
And some further comments on recent events in Cobh Cathedral:
http://img166.imageshack.us/my.php?image=articleirishtimesjb7.png
The following is the official announcement posted on the Cloyne Diocesan webpage re the Tridentine Mass celebrated in Cobh Cathedral last Tuesday. It makes for some interesting reading:
Celebration of Holy Mass
in accordance with the Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”
of Pope Benedict XVI.Mass was celebrated in the Cathedral of Saint Colman in Cobh on Easter Tuesday at 12 noon according to the extraordinary Rite promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 .
The Celebrant of the Mass was His Lordship, the Most Reverend John Magee, Bishop of Cloyne. The assistant Priest was the V. Rev. Michael Leamy, Administrator of the Cathedral. The Master of Ceremonies was the Rev. Robin Morrissey, M.C. to the Bishop.
The Cathedral Choir was under the Direction of its Director, Mr. Dominic Finn. A team of Cathedral Altar Servers served the Mass.In accordance with the Norms laid down by the Bishop of Cloyne, following the promulgation of the Motu Proprio “Summorum Pontificum”, all Parish Priests will respond to any request from a group of faithful of their Parish to have the extraordinary Rite of Holy Mass celebrated in their Parish. This will be done for pastoral reasons.
The Mass celebrated in the Cathedral of Saint Colman on Easter Tuesday was in response to a Diocesan request.
@johnglas wrote:
No regrets at the return of the ‘new’ old rite, but ‘fiddle-back’ chasubles and lace-edged albs? I seem to remember that pre-Vat II there had been a liturgical revival which involved (inter alia) a return to fuller (‘Gothic’) chasubles and plainer albs (‘alb’ = (plain) white). My secondary school church history book (c. early 1960s) – not an unconservative tome by any means – referred to gold braid and lace (and, by implication, fiddle-back chasubles) as ’18th century bad taste’. It wasn’t wrong.
The book reflects a certain current in the slightly earlier liturgical movement which apportioned to the sobriquet of bad taste to anything not of its persuasion. Of course, thise side of the liturgical movement was not exactly the source of the wreckaghe that ensued in the aftermath of the Council. For that we have to look to more hardened archaeologists types seton recreating the liturgical practoces of the Gregory the Great within a pedogogical context by now long dated.
True, the vestments worn in Cobh were not best examples of their type but there are other splendid examples of the same type available and just sitting and waiting.
@brianq wrote:
Hi all
back again for another stint of fun and frolics – to help this forum get back to some sort of fidelity to the mind of the Holy Roman and Apostolic Catholic Church as expressed in Vat2 and subsequent documents etc.
Regarding below:
Just take a look at this guff:“As liturgical consultants, we help you form your new worship environment into a central element in your ministry and pastoral planning. We do this in two ways – by designing the worship interior and its elements, and by facilitating an interactive process that discerns the worship needs of the community prior to a commitment to construction”.
And this, which makes absolutely clear that any mess created in the process is truly YOURS and no one else’s:
BQ: no – and i’m at a loss to see how you came to that conclusion from my statement. A ‘mess’ can be due to many factors.
“The role of a liturgical consultant is to facilitate a process that ensures your new worship environment not only accommodates your spatial needs, but resonates with your tradition and aspirations. Such a process involves as many from the parish as possible and is adapted to, and inspired by, your community. This guided consultation is an opportunity to reflect on your Christian commitment and how your worship space reflects and nourishes that commitment. Just as each community is unique, so is the guided process and so is the result”.
What happens when the parish just does not want what ever is concocted by the “decision-making” committee?
BQ: that’s an easy one, it’s highly likely it won’t proceed or will be substantially amended. The parish decide whether to proceed or not. I have been involved in a process where it was decided not to proceed – a fact I refer to on the website by the way which somehow you didn’t mention.
BQ[/QUOTE]
Well what about the Dromaroad mess Who is responsible for that and can we identify at least some of the many factors?
@Fearg wrote:
I notice that it was the temporary altar which was used..
Word has it that Bishop Magee was not able to use the High Altar because of his knee operation – the steps would have been too difficult to negotiate.
Otherwise, using the temporary altar would make no sense at all. The Cathedral authorities have tome and again reiterated how unworthy it is for Mass but has to be used in order to be able to face the people. But, when there is no need to face the people there is no justification for using an unworthy altar is there?
Delighted to see Brianq back again for some fun and frolicks. We were missing you, as they say.
And so to the nux. We note the following from the above:
“The parish decide whether to proceed or not”.
That is surely the statement of the century and it all depends on how you define “parish”. In most cases, it is a simple matter of “la paroisse, c’est moi” – parish priest speaking. Despite a veneer of lay participation etc. Geneva has not yet reached the decision making processes of the Cthaolic Church – at any level. And of course, it cannot be expected to.
As for the decision making process in which the pariush decided not to proceed with a make over, well all we can say is taht one swallow does not a summer. And are you sure the “parish” had been told by the PP to reject whatever it was thta had been proposed?
Well, here is a conversion story sent to Praxiteles. We now await seeing whether this undertaking will be honoured – or not, as the case may be, in Cobh.
@ake wrote:
I’m wondering if the photographer’s over generous saturation may not be giving the church a fair show.
any shots perhaps?
On the Isenheimer Altar piece:
On Palm Sunday, the first Christian church was consecrated in Quater. Given the significance of the move, you would have imagined that an extra special effort could have been amde. While no crosses or Christian insignia can appear ont he external walls -fine gven the circumstances- you would have imagined that some effort wuld have been amde with the interior. BUt…no such luck. $20 million later we have a 2,5000 expandable to 5,000 seater auditorium. I believe that the Emir of Quatar need not have worried one little bit about a CHristian prayer house. The architect involved here made sure taht he got something that even he should be mildly worried about – a completely non-religious space taht could just as easily serve as a music hall.
The Isenheim Altar Piece (1515) of Mattias Gruenewald which is regarded as the most important statement of the Northern European Renaissance:
The Crucifixion flanked on the left by St. Sebastian, protector against plague and on the right by St Anthony Abbot, patron of the monastery in Isenheim for which the picture was painted.
Grunewald depicted the figure of Christ in this picture with all the realistic detail of those who died of the plague. On the left of the centre panel, Our Lady supported by St John, teh Evangelist, and Mary Magdalen kneeling. On the right, St John the Baptist and the Lamb of God.
http://www.wga.hu/frames-e.html?/html/g/grunewal/2isenhei/index.html
