Oh! We missed a homily by Jesse Jackson

I don’t know what to feel about this, sadness, disgust or both. They have a discussion forum on their website, wouldn’t it be funny if all of your readers posted there and told St. Gertrude’s just what they think about Jesse Jackson and the “gym” mass?

Todd,

I mentioned the fact that he use to be pro-life in the post.

My complaint about the Gym Mass was the communal homily and liturgical dance, both which strictly are not allowed. As far as the locations goes, Redemptionis Sacramentum says:.

[108.] �The celebration of the Eucharist is to be carried out in a sacred place, unless in a particular case necessity requires otherwise. In this case the celebration must be in a decent place.�[197] The diocesan Bishop shall be the judge for his diocese concerning this necessity, on a case-by-case basis.

[109.] It is never lawful for a Priest to celebrate in a temple or sacred place of any non-Christian religion.

So the question would be is this approved by his Bishop and that the circumstances truly necessitate this. If done temporarily while building a new church would be one thing. Permanently would be a whole other matter.

Jesse Jackson is a clown

Peace, Jeff.

I did see your comment about Jackson; that’s why I mentioned it was the “most saddening.” Dance remains a disputed point, even in Rome. And the sad truth is, lots of parishes are encouraged by their bishops to found schools at the expense of having a decent worship space. In a nearby diocese, it is common practice with the approval of the bishop. Still a silly decision, but one in which, like dance, people are given plenty of wiggle room when the mood suits.

A parish near us had a Mass every Wednesday evening which seemed to appeal especially to the Peace’N’Justice committee members, in which Father read the Gospel and then invited congregants to tell, from the pews, what it meant to them. I wanted to wait for a Wednesday when the Gospel was something really juicy, and then attend and give a short talk about it from an orthodox viewpoint, but Cacciaguida put the kybosh on it. They’d probably have called security and had me thrown out.

An interesting fact:
On March 25 of this year, the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments put out a document “Redemptoris Sacramentum”. In it it states:

64. The homily, which is given in the course of the celebration of Holy Mass and is a part of the Liturgy itself, �should ordinarily be given by the Priest celebrant himself. He may entrust it to a concelebrating Priest or occasionally, according to circumstances, to a Deacon, but never to a layperson. In particular cases and for a just cause, the homily may even be given by a Bishop or a Priest who is present at the celebration but cannot concelebrate�.
65. It should be borne in mind that any previous norm that may have admitted non-ordained faithful to give the homily during the eucharistic celebration is to be considered abrogated by the norm of canon 767 �1. This practice is reprobated, so that it cannot be permitted to attain the force of custom.
66. The prohibition of the admission of laypersons to preach within the Mass applies also to seminarians, students of theological disciplines, and those who have assumed the function of those known as �pastoral assistants�; nor is there to be any exception for any other kind of layperson, or group, or community, or association.”

I think this disqualifies “Rev.” Jackson from preaching during the context of the Mass.

I would recommend that all bloggers register at St. Gertrude’s discussion forum (it’s quick and easy) and post your frustration concerning Jesse Jackson’s visit.

JJ–you are absolutely right that no layperson is allowed to give the homily. Even the longstanding practice of seminarians giving homilies has been disallowed in Redemptionis sacramentum.

Todd,

Those other documents I referenced were commisioned by the Bishops, but were never voted for approval.

Todd,

And we’re free to continue saying it goes against the law of the Church, and the spirit of the Liturgy, and referencing strong statements against it, from Rome and elsewhere.

Although this is not authoritative, it does carry some weight:

Cardinal Arinze responded to questions on the liturgy at a 2003 conference sponsored by the Apostolate for Family Consecration. On liturgical dance, he said:

There has never been a document from our Congregation for Divine Worship and Discipline of the Sacraments saying that dance is approved in the Mass.

The question of dance is difficult and delicate. However, it is good to know that the tradition of the Latin Church has not known the dance. It is something that people are introducing in the last ten years — or twenty years. It was not always so. Now it is spreading like wildfire, one can say, in all the continents — some more than others. In my own continent, Africa, it is spreading. In Asia, it is spreading.

Now, some priests and lay people think that Mass is never complete without dance. The difficulty is this: we come to Mass primarily to adore God — what we call the vertical dimension. We do not come to Mass to entertain one another. That’s not the purpose of Mass. The parish hall is for that.

So all those that want to entertain us — after Mass, let us go to the parish hall and then you can dance. And then we clap. But when we come to Mass we don’t come to clap. We don’t come to watch people, to admire people. We want to adore God, to thank Him, to ask Him pardon for our sins, and to ask Him for what we need.

Don’t misunderstand me, because when I said this at one place somebody said to me: “you are an African bishop. You Africans are always dancing. Why do you say we don’t dance?”

A moment — we Africans are not always dancing! [laughter]

Moreover, there is a difference between those who come in procession at Offertory; they bring their gifts, with joy. There is a movement of the body right and left. They bring their gifts to God. That is good, really. And some of the choir, they sing. They have a little bit of movement. Nobody is going to condemn that. And when you are going out again, a little movement, it’s all right.

But when you introduce wholesale, say, a ballerina, then I want to ask you what is it all about. What exactly are you arranging? When the people finish dancing in the Mass and then when the dance group finishes and people clap — don’t you see what it means? It means we have enjoyed it. We come for enjoyment. Repeat. So, there is something wrong. Whenever the people clap — there is something wrong — immediately. When they clap — a dance is done and they clap.

It is possible that there could be a dance that is so exquisite that it raises people’s minds to God, and they are praying and adoring God and when the dance is finished they are still wrapped up in prayer. But is that the type of dance you have seen? You see. It is not easy.

Most dances that are staged during Mass should have been done in the parish hall. And some of them are not even suitable for the parish hall.

I saw in one place — I will not tell you where — where they staged a dance during Mass, and that dance was offensive. It broke the rules of moral theology and modesty. Those who arranged it — they should have had their heads washed with a bucket of holy water! [laughter]

Why make the people of God suffer so much? Haven’t we enough problems already? Only Sunday, one hour, they come to adore God. And you bring a dance! Are you so poor you have nothing else to bring us? Shame on you! That’s how I feel about it.

Somebody can say, “but the pope visited this county and the people danced”. A moment: Did the pope arrange it? Poor Holy Father — he comes, the people arranged. He does not know what they arranged. And somebody introduces something funny — is the pope responsible for that? Does that mean it is now approved? Did they put in on the table of the Congregation for Divine Worship? We would throw it out! If people want to dance, they know where to go.