Storm in a Chalice...

It's difficult to understand why this is news:

PRIESTS fear that altar wine will put them over the legal limit, making it impossible for them to drive to conduct essential duties.
Those working alone in rural churches fear that they may be over the legal limit if they have to drive to give the last rites to parishioners.
One priest in a rural north Galway parish said he sometimes has to finish the wine left over in the chalices. He feels that this could put him over the limit if he had to drive afterwards.
According to church law, wine which has been consecrated must be consumed as part of the Mass.
"What option do I have but drink the wine, as the chalices have to be emptied before being put back in the tabernacle?" he said.
"The only other possibility would be to ask some members of the congregation to drink the excess wine. This would be unseemly and certainly not Church practice."

What a non-story... If that is a worry for the priest, then all he need do is consecrate a sip of wine for himself. Given that the administration of Communion under both species is very much the exception rather than the rule in Ireland, there's no question of people being upset that the chalice isn't made availible.
At least we can give Fr Brian Darcy credit for making one thing clear:

"Perhaps it could be enough for you to fail a drink-driving test. I don't like to use the word wine, as it is Christ's blood in the Eucharist -- but it still has all the characteristics of wine when in the blood stream."

A more serious problem, and one that is more difficult to resolve, is highlighted later in the report:

Priests in larger towns and cities may be affected too according to Fr Stephen Farragher, administrator in Tuam.
"I would often have three Masses to say in the one day and while I had not thought about the impact of drinking the wine, it is probably now a factor that needs to be seriously considered," he said.

Obviously it is contrary to Canon Law that a priest be expected to trinate on any day other than a Sunday. This is a problem for the Church in Ireland. In the planning of Mass-schedules and so on, priests need to be more careful about taking into account the Church's regulations on bination and trination, and episcopal leadership on this would be very welcome. I remember being impressed by this letter of Bishop Martino of Scranton, and think that the Irish Church would benefit from a similar reminder:

It is the Church’s ancient discipline and practice that, except for very special occasions like Christmas and All Souls Day, her priests celebrate only one Mass a day. So august is God’s gift of the Eucharist, so important is the spiritual preparation for it, so careful and attentive must its celebration be, and so essential the thanksgiving to be made afterward as priests carry forth its grace to the rest of their ministry, that the multiplication of this central act in a priest’s daily life runs the risk of diminishing the value he places on it. Such a danger imperils the whole community of faith along with its priest. The law, therefore, is not an arbitrary one. It provides an essential means of fostering the holiness of the Church’s faithful.
And yet the Church, ever solicitous for the spiritual needs of the faithful and mindful of the shortage of clergy, gives its bishops the authority to permit priests, for a just cause, to celebrate two Masses on weekdays and, for a true pastoral necessity, even three Masses on a Sunday or holy day of obligation. Our priests have had this permission and they now have it from me. However, I cannot allow the limits of this permission to be exceeded. As your Bishop, I must ask you to accept the decision of your priest when he tells you that he cannot offer another Mass on a particular day.
Appeals to practicality, convenience, or long-term contrary custom must not be allowed to derail this effort. All of us – but I, especially, as your Bishop – are gravely obliged to be stewards of the Church’s mysteries and the age-old discipline that has been fashioned to preserve them.

The Indwelling of the Holy Spirit - A Homily to Be Preached to a Community of Religious Sisters

29 October 2007 - Monday of the 30th Week of Ordinary Time - Readings

Saint Paul speaks to us today of one of the great mysteries of our lives as Christians - the in dwelling of the Holy Spirit.

Through our baptism, Christ has made us sons and daughters of the Heavenly Father, and so that this title might be more than just an empty saying, the Holy Spirit has been poured into our hearts. It is the same Spirit in whom and through whom the Son of God brought healing to many during His earthly life. With that Power at work in us, what do we have to fear?

But St Paul tells us something else; he tells us that when our soul calls God "Father", it is the Spirit who is speaking in us. He is the one who is at work in us, even in the intimacy of our most private prayer. And perhaps this seems a little shocking. Have we lost all freedom if we give credit for our prayer to the Holy Spirit, rather than to our own efforts? Certainly not, because the Spirit is the Spirit of Sonship who liberates asked from the slavery of sin and of fear, and to permits us to live the lives of sons and daughters of the Lord whose driving force is the love we have for our Heavenly Father. We cannot claim any credit for this love, but if we can trust ourselves to it we learn that it leads to true freedom.

If we do some good today, if we bear some suffering gladly, then we are becoming a little more like Christ and coming a little bit closer to the glory he promises. If that happens, let us give thanks for the gift of the Holy Spirit who lifts our soul and makes possible what is beyond the limits of our fallen nature. Knowing that he is at work in us, we realise that there is no place in us for a pride, but every reason for us to be joyful.

On the Fate of Origen

From Jean Leclercq's The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture (pp 95-6):

A curious document reveals the anxiety which was felt over not only the orthodoxy of Origen's doctrine but for his personal salvation as well. The nun Elizabeth of Schonau (+1164) tells us that one Christmas night, during a vision, she asked the Virgin Mary about this, at the instigation of her brother Egbert of Schonau, a Benedictine.

In accordance with the counsel I received from my brother who at that very moment was celebrating the office at our convent, I addressed her in this fashion: "My Lady, I beg of you, kindly reveal to me something concering the great doctor of the Church, Origen, who in so many places in his works has sung your praises so magnificently. Is he saved or not? For the Catholic Church condemns him because of the many heresies found in his writings." To which she answered in these words: "It is not the Lord's intention that muchg be revealed to you at this point. Know only that Origen's error did not come from bad will; it came from the excess of fervour with which he plunged into the depths of the Holy Scriptures he loved, and the divine mysteries which he was wont to scrutinize to an excessive degree. For this reason, the punishment he is undergoing is not severe. And because of the glory his writings have given me, he is illuminated by a very special light on each feast commemorating me. As for what will happen to him on the last day, that must not be revealed to you, but must remain hidden among the divine secrets.

NCPI Disbanded

There was surprising news from the NCPI's recent conference:

The National Conference of Priests of Ireland (NCPI), which has represented both diocesan and religious priests in Ireland for 31 years, is set to wind up.
According to a report in the Irish Catholic newspaper, a lack of activity in local branches meant that there were insufficient delegates to validly elect a new President at this year's AGM of the Conference.
A motion was put before the AGM to wind up the NCPI and this was agreed. Reacting to the news, outgoing President Fr John Littleton told ciNews that it was "a sad reflection on the morale of priests in Ireland".
The National Executive Committee (NEC) of the NCPI will now assist in the legal process of winding up the Conference.
A spokesperson for the NEC, Fr William Bermingham, said that there seemed to be "a lack of connection between the NEC and priests in local areas".
"Priests didn't seem to feel a sense of ownership regarding the NCPI," he said. This had created organisational difficulties, which the NEC had been seeking to address. However, ultimately they had decided to cease operations, in order to allow the possibility for a new representative body to emerge.

Would you believe that I have no strong opinions on this dissolution? That's because during the entire period of my seminary training and my brief priestly life to date the NCPI has made absolutely zero impression on me. I cannot recall, for good or for ill, any contribution that the Conference has made to debates within the Church or in the broader public square. The fact that I'd heard nothing from and virtually nothing about the Conference before its dissolution probably says a lot about the organization. The report continues:

However, Fr Bermingham stressed that such a body would have to emerge after a great deal of reflection amongst priests. "We have no template for an alternative body," he insisted.
He said that the organisation had "worked very well over the past number of years", but that such operations "tend to bloom and wane".
For over three decades, the NCPI has acted as the professional body for priests nationally, and has sought to promote every aspect of the priestly ministry. However, Fr Bermingham suggested that, with priests taking on increasingly specialised roles, such as school chaplaincy, the remit of the NCPI had perhaps been too wide.

Is this so? On the ground, it seems to be a movement away from these specialised roles towards an increasing concentration on bread-and-butter parish ministry.

The work of the winding up committee will include finalising all the legal and financial details, and it is expected that it will have concluded its task by the end of November.
At their autumn meeting, the bishops expressed concern at the current absence of a national representative body for priests.
"The NCPI played an important role as a forum to support the priests of Ireland, and to discuss and represent their views. Since it was founded over thirty years ago, it has promoted and organised many useful initiatives for priests - diocesan, religious and missionary - including residential renewal programmes and annual conferences," said the statement they released yesterday.
The bishops have now decided that the President of the Bishops’ Conference will invite the chairman of each Diocesan Council of Priests, from across the country, to a meeting to see what can be done.

A Sign of the Times?

I've not had much in the way of preaching duties recently, thus the paucity of sermons posted recently. However, I did think this article from the Telegraph concering the personal safety issues faced by Anglican clergy was worth looking at.

Vicars have been told to stop wearing dog-collars because they increase the likelihood of them being attacked.
Even the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, should abandon the traditional dress, according to the Church of England's security adviser.
A new report warns clergy that the collars make them an "easy target" and says they should adopt more casual clothing in a bid to give them greater safety.
It was commissioned after the murder in March of Paul Bennett, vicar of St Fagan's Church in Trecynon, near Aberdare, who became the fifth cleric to be killed in a decade.
Other safety measures proposed include disguising the whereabouts of the vicarage by taking down signs and ensuring that the front doors of their homes do not have a letter box that people can look through.
However, it is the recommendation that they should cease wearing dog-collars in public that is most controversial. They have been worn since the early 19th century and many priests are not seen without them.

Needless to say, I think this is a totally wrong-headed approach as it manages to overlook the necessity of clergy and their homes being easily identifiable, to say nothing of the spiritual and social importance of clerical dress.
The report continues.

More attacks are carried out on priests than probation officers and GPs, according to the latest figures. Between 1997 and 1999, 12 per cent of clergy were assaulted and seven out of ten were abused or threatened.
Nick Tolson, the coordinator of National Churchwatch - the organisation that produced the report, claimed that there would be no attacks on clergy if they heeded the advice.
"They haven't been streetwise in the past," he said. "They need to realise that wearing the dog collar makes them a target, especially in the case of single females. It isn't wise for them to wear it out shopping or in the car and they should never wear it when alone. The Archbishop and other bishops should give a lead in this."
The paper has been passed to the Ven Christopher Lowson, an adviser to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who will send it to dioceses ahead of a meeting next year at which the Church will decide whether to endorse the proposals.
However, the Rev David Houlding, a prebendary at St Paul's cathedral, attacked the recommendation as a "silly, fashionable idea".
"I feel much safer wearing my dog collar when I'm walking through the streets at night. There is still an air of respect to it," he said. "Most of the time I wear it every day. It's my uniform. We'd lose our presence in the community and our witness."
He argued that he is well aware of the risks of being a cleric, but that he has already made sensible changes, such as refusing to see people on their own at the vicarage.

But I wish to stray...

I owe an apology to those of you who have been expecting/hoping for more frequent updates. Anyway, today's Office of Readings from St Augustine's On the Shepherds struck me as worth sharing (courtesy of Argent):

The shepherd seeks out the straying sheep, but because they have wandered away and are lost they say that they are not ours. “ Why do you want us? Why do you seek us?” they ask, as if their straying and being lost were not the very reason for our wanting them and seeking them out. “If I am straying”, he says, “if I am lost, why do you want me?” You are straying, that is why I wish to recall you. You have been lost, I wish to find you. “But I wish to stray”, he says: “I wish to be lost”.
So you wish to stray and be lost? How much better that I do not also wish this. Certainly, I dare say, I am unwelcome. But I listen to the Apostle who says: Preach the word; insist upon it, welcome and unwelcome. Welcome to whom? Unwelcome to whom? By all means welcome to those who desire it; unwelcome to those who do not. However unwelcome, I dare to say: “You wish to stray, you wish to be lost; but I do not want this”. For the one whom I fear does not wish this. And should I wish it, consider his words of reproach: The straying sheep you have not recalled; the lost sheep you have not sought. Shall I fear you rather than him? Remember, we must all present ourselves before the judgement seat of Christ.

Can one describe the dilemma of the priest today any more accurately than St Augustine did? We find ourselves bound to the preaching of a way of life that is alien to so many of those around us, and we find that society frequently asks us to collude in the privitization of the moral life. We're told that the message we proclaim isn't relevant to the modern world, and that people should be allowed pursue their own way of life without reference to the morality we proclaim. We should, we are told, allow people to have their own 'private' lives and to not be judgemental.
It's a tempting option... to stay on the level of 'spirituality' and people's 'personal relationship with God', but Augustine will not have it so. His words are a powerful corrective to the lassitude which threatens the life and ministry of the priest. He insists that many souls are wandering and that even if they protest that they're not lost, or that they wish to be lost, we still have our duty. We have been given a responsability, and it is out of love of Christ and out neighbour and a healthy fear for our souls that we are asked to step away from the consensus of society and to continue to speak of sin, knowing that we cannot tell of the relationship between God and men without acknowledging that the conseqences of that relationship affect every dimension of human life. To speak of forgiveness and mercy is a nonsense if we do not also speak about sin.
I wish that some of our secular critics could read a little of what Augustine has to say - his words today also serve as our very up to date apologia. We're not here to judge or condemn or to make people feel uncomfortable for the sake of making them uncomfortable. We'd much rather not to have to do that. We are striving to be shepherds and the sheep are free to heed our call or not. However, we could not live with ourselves if we were silent, if we allowed the flock to wander. At least show us the same indulgence you give to climate-change activists...

An apology

.... is due to both my readers for the decided lack of content on th blog. I've been away from my computer recently, and will be for another week or so.