Sunday, May 6, 2012

Fr. Goodwin FSSP, Latin Mass Video Part 1

You are in for a real treat here! Father Calvin Goodwin, FSSP visited Christ the King in Sarasota two weeks ago, and he gave a couple of talks on the Latin Mass. Perhaps this talk should be titled, 'The Mass That Refused to Die.' This video was just uploaded, and a second one is soon to be uploaded. I had the rare opportunity to chat to Fr. Goodwin because I had him hostage in my car when I picked him up at the airport! Poor Fr. Goodwin had to answer questions for over an hour as I and a friend of mine drove him to the rectory! He is a font of knowledge, and has many stories to share about his experience in the Church. At any rate, enjoy the video. I will post the other video when it gets posted. Please send this video around to others if you are a firm supporter of the Latin Mass. If you are not, hopefully after watching this video you will be! Sharing this video is an opportunity to help build the Latin Mass up for Holy Mother Church.


Anonymous said...

Thanks so much for posting this. I just watched the whole thing and am really looking forward to the next segment. What a wonderful teacher of the Faith, Fr. Goodwin is.

Jae said...

Fr. Goodwin must be a good, holy priest, no doubt. I almost agree with him 100 percent and sympathized with his thought and apprehensions which have compelling merits.

Firstly, when he mentioned about the modern architectural structure (comtempory edifice) somehow affect the "identity" and "reverence" of the Catholic Church....REPLY: it does not necessarily follows his conclusion, though I must admit some of these behemoths are not suitable in taste for house of worship that cater more for banality but there are exemptions like, look at the Padre Pio Shrine in San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy, modern yet very Catholic and inspirational.

Secondly, he also mentioned the "kneeling" and "receiving in the hand" somehow impinge on "reverence" due to God...REPLY: Though I believed and preferred to kneel when receiving the Holy Host, kneeling by itself doesn't necessarily mean one is more "reverent" to God than the one who is standing up albeit the act of kneeling is a good external sign of reverence. However, one can kneel all day but if his heart is far from God or doesn't discern of what he's receiving (The True Body and Blood of the Lord) then his kneeling is useless and in fact more liable to judgment. I honestly think God is looking more for the pure intention and true disposition of one's heart than of external actions....much like the parable of Jesus on the Pharisee and the Publican.

Anyways, these falls under the practices and disciplines of the Church which she has the Authority to changed from time to time whereas Dogmas she can't.

Jae said...

In a nutshell:

Not all things taught by the Church is unchangeable. Only Dogmas and Substance of the Faith are unchanging. Practices develops and are being changed from time to time. The Church is "ONE AND THE SAME FOR ALL TIME" but she is also "SEMPER REFORMADA" - in constant process of change and development - like a mustard seed. Definitely the practices and liturgy of the 18th Century are not the same as the practices and liturgy of the 1st Century of Christianity but the Dogmas and Substance ARE THE SAME.


Andrew W said...

This was a great anniversary event. Fr Goodwin's message was exactly what I needed to hear. We have been blessed to have such good speakers visit our little chapel - in addition to our wonderful priests.

Andrew W said...

Hello Jae,

Are you disagreeing about kneeling while receiving our Lord during Holy Communion?

I agree with your point about internal disposition - our external comportment should follow and flow from our internal disposition. As you say, it should be a manifestation of our own faith and sincere desire to show reverence to our Lord.

However, I have never understood this argument in the context of our posture at Holy Communion. One should not even consider presenting themselves to receive Holy Communion if one is not properly disposed. Proper disposition (sincere desire to adore and receive our Lord, and being a baptized Catholic in the state of grace who can receive) is presumed by the very fact that they are presenting themselves to receive Holy Communion.

If we aren't properly disposed, receiving in any manner (standing, kneeling, or on your head) is an empty act and can even be sacrilegious depending on the circumstances.

Recognizing that, it then becomes a question of which posture is proper to the sacramental presence of our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament and better conveys the humility before God that the parable you reference is showing us we need to have.

Jae said...

Andrew the question of posture is secondary almost irrelevant to convey humility and reverence albeit a good external sign but is not required because of a number of reasons ranging from time and physical constrains of the number of communicants all lining up in the Altar to receive the Holy Host. In The Last Supper, the Apostles were all sitting down and some standing but all loved the the Lord with a humblest of heart.

Matthew Bellisario said...

Jae writes, "Andrew the question of posture is secondary almost irrelevant to convey humility and reverence albeit a good external sign but is not required because of a number of reasons ranging from time and physical constrains of the number of communicants all lining up in the Altar to receive the Holy Host"

Jae, first of all, time is of little consequence. Do you really think they were unable to give communion to large groups of communicants when they received on their knees at the altar rail before VCII? Did you know it actually goes just as fast?

Secondly, our Holy Father also wants Catholics to receive kneeling and on the tongue. You said that posture is "almost irrelevant?" No that is not the case, at least according the Holy Father.

Marini, the Holy Father's current Master of Ceremonies said, "The method adopted by Benedict XVI tends to underscore the force of the norm valid for the whole Church. In addition, one could perhaps also note a preference for using this method of distribution which, without taking anything from the other, better sheds light on the truth of the Real Presence in the Eucharist, it helps the the devotion of the faithful, introduces them more easily to a sense of mystery. Aspects which, in our time, speaking pastorally, it is urgent to highlight and recover."

It is now the papal norm to give Holy Communion on the tongue kneeling because as is stated above, it better sheds light on the truth of Christ in the Eucharist. It seems that it is very relevant for the Pope.

Finally, for something you deem as being "almost irrelevant" the then Cardinal Ratzinger dedicated the last 50 pages of his book 'Spirit and Liturgy' to discuss posture and the Mass.

Jae said...

Don't get me wrong, I said from my previous post that I preferred and believed that kneeling in receiving the Eucharist however, I guess I have wrong choice of words when I said "almost irrelevant". What I was just trying to convey was the Church doesn't place the kneeling part as a requirement because of the time and physical factors. The example you made before VII, yes they were able to give communion to large numbers of communicants but took them more than 2 hours to finish the whole Mass not feasible to the majority of flock.

Anyways, can you give a direct quote from B16 that he requires the faithful to kneel receiving the Eucharist because the citation you made nowhere state as such....KNEELING. Peace.

Jae said...

Also did B16 made kneeling as official teaching to the Universal Church as incorporated in the rubrics of the liturgy? Or the diocesean Bishops have the option? I just wanted to know, anyways for me and family we always kneel.

Andrew W said...

The idea behind my current practice of having people kneel to receive Communion on the tongue was to send a signal and to underscore the Real Presence with an exclamation point.

Benedict XVI, "Light of the World"

Andrew W said...

Clearly our Holy Father thinks there are other considerations than time and physical factors.

Also, it has never been the case that those physically unable to were denied communion - that would be absurd. At our parish, all receive on the tongue, and all who can are requested to kneel. Not everyone can, and those that can't don't. They stand at the rail and receive. I don't know what other physical considerations there would be.

Time is another issue, but doesn't have to be. Kneeling in place of standing, in a single file line, would be slower. But, this is not how it should be done. A return to reception while kneeling would necessitate a restoration of altar rails or at least virtual ones, where communicants can form rows for receiving. Once a congregation knows how to present themselves at an altar rail, kneeling can be just as fast. The communicants fill in a row along the rail, kneeling, and the priest walks from one end to the other distributing communion. Once he reaches the end, new communicants are already waiting back at the end where he started.

I hope to see Churches starting to use altar rails again.

These arguments of "practicality" need to be dismantled. Yes, there are time and physical considerations, but we can't let that obscure the damage that is being done by a diminishment of the belief in the Sacrament Presence that the current communion practices (standing, in the hand) are contributing to. They may not directly be the cause, but they also don't clarify things either. Reception on the tongue and kneeling would certainly do that. And where it has been done, it almost always follows catechesis on why it is being done, which the faithful also badly need.

More and more bishops are following the Holy Father's lead in returning to these practices. May it continue.

Andrew W said...

When I said:

"I hope to see Churches..."

I meant that to be a little 'c', as in the physical structures.

Andrew W said...

You know, the time argument against kneeling also contradicts another of the liberal's bogeymen often trotted out to help dissuade Catholics from desiring a return to the pre-conciliar forms of worship - the 15 minute low-Mass.

If Masses this short were so prevalent up until the liturgy was "restored" after the council, how did they manage to distribute Holy Communion and keep to the tight schedule?

Maybe liberals would answer that nobody received because the pre-V2 Church scared the faithful into scrupulosity with teachings about sin and hell that they didn't think themselves worthy to receive. Maybe they have some other response?

Not sure how these two strawmen occupy the same space. Must be a paradox.

Andrew W said...

Interesting website:

Andrew W said...

While I am taking up comment box space, I might also throw this one out on the table:

I would include the dismantling of the armies of "Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion" on my "if I were pope" short list of liturgical quick-fix-its. I have been at daily masses where there were literally more of them than there were communicants.

Jae said...

Andrew, I totally agree with what you have said about the subject, no doubt you have my support, however the meat of the argument is: Does the singular act of kneeling and receiving communion on the tongue makes one automatically more pious and reverent to God than the one standing up? Is it a grave sin and a violation of any Church Law for the one who receives standing up? Do we need to make judgment that the one standing up is less reverent? (some hurled name calling like being liberals, neo-protestants, neo-pagans etc-a grave sin by itself).

Noticed also the words of the Holy Father it's like putting exclamation point after the real meat, that is, the act of humble discernment of the Real Presence. One can still be a good humble catholic without the exclamation point, right?

The point is, we don't judge based on the exclamation point!

Scott said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Scott said...

Jae said (in two separate posts):
"...the question of posture is secondary almost irrelevant to convey humility and reverence albeit a good external sign but is not required..."

"Does the singular act of kneeling and receiving communion on the tongue makes one automatically more pious and reverent to God than the one standing up? Is it a grave sin and a violation of any Church Law for the one who receives standing up? Do we need to make judgment that the one standing up is less reverent?"

With regard to the first, the Fathers have spoken heavily on the importance of posture in prayer. If your posture whilst praying is important, than your posture whilst receiving communion is undoubtedly important.

With regard to the second, we hear often of "cultural relevance" in the post-conciliar Church. Try as modernists might, kneeling (and on the tongue) is still a cultural sign of reverence in Western society and former European colonies. It is not a grave sin to receive standing. Eastern Churches have received standing for centuries, but this was not in response to "submissive theology" of kneeling, but out of their own practices and customs that have been foreign to the Western Church for a very long time if not since the beginning. Does it make you more pious? I don't know, it's above my pay grade. At worst it will instill a pious habit, and it is only a mystery what grace comes from said habit. Making judgement is inevitable, as bad as it is. More concern with being "judgmental" than with what is due to Our Lord is a greater problem than simply being judgmental. This is simply an observation, but I've found that those for communion in the hand are quicker to pull the "holier than thou" card than trads are to pull the "irreverence card."