Posted on 03/26/2004 6:47:24 PM PST by Land of the Irish
Helen (a pseudonym) describes herself as devoutly Catholic. She attends St. Anne's Parish Community in Discovery Bay in the diocese of Oakland. Most parishioners there, she says, are excited about the changes in the parish made by their pastor, Father Ron Schmit -- who is also chairman of the art and design committee (formerly referred to as the liturgy committee) for the new Oakland cathedral.
Helen, though, told me a few of the things that bothered her about the parish. For one thing, she said, Father Schmit is very proud that he will be acquiring for the parish a crucifix with a fully naked Jesus. (Another parishioner I talked to joked that perhaps this was Father's way of teaching the pope's Theology of the Body). Another thing that angered Helen happened at Christmas Eve Mass, when two girls, between the ages of ten and twelve, pretending to be Joseph and Mary, danced at Mass to a song with the words, "would you pick some grapes from the tree." Their dresses, Helen said, had slits that went up to the waist.
According to Helen, St Anne's sometimes uses leavened bread for its hosts. "It rose and was sweeter than it should be," she said. "My mother called the rectory, and they insist it's unleavened. They got the recipe off the internet."
Helen is not alone in her confusion about what is happening at her church.
Joyce Davis lived in Discovery Bay for six years, up until 2002, and was a parishioner of St. Anne's. She told me that the pastoral associate, Gail McGuire, reads the Gospel once a month at the Children's Mass and delivers the homily. Davis said she received a letter from Father Schmit in which he said that the reason McGuire does this is that she is "good with children" -- even though the children troop out of the church for the Liturgy of the Word. Once McGuire, said Davis, conducted a Eucharistic service (no Mass) and instructed everyone to bring his chair closer to the altar, thus forming a circle. "Everyone took their own Jesus from the ciborium. I couldn't do it," said Davis. "The Eucharist is something given, not taken."
Joyce also informed me that Father Schmit "pulled the kneelers, and pews out of the church, and had a garage sale." She also said Father Ron wrote in the Contra Costa Times in support of gay marriages. In the March 12, 2000 edition of the Contra Costa Times, Father Ron is quoted as being "saddened" that the bishops supported Proposition 22 banning gay marriages in California. He argued that divorce is also condemned in the Bible, but no one is clamoring to make divorce illegal.
According to Joyce, Father Schmit once said, "the Bible is just a bunch of stories." She said he often uses the term "Spirit of Vatican II" to justify his actions. Furthermore, as if Catholic moral teaching were simply suggestions, she claimed Schmit said, "in a perfect world, we could all follow the catechism".
In early February, Schmit delivered a controversial sermon regarding the nature of the parish as well as the priesthood. At the request of parishioners, within the bulletin he distributed a flier that lists the source material he used for his sermon, which Helen faxed to me. Among his sources was a book written by William J. Bausch, called The Parish of the Next Millenium. According to Helen, Schmit recommends this book to those interested in getting involved with ministry.
Schmit's handout includes the following quotations from Bausch's book: "The parish of the Christian millenium will be lay oriented, with shared and collaborative ministry." "It will be grounded not so much in ordination and office as in baptism and charism, wherein the baptismal call to discipleship binds believers in a common mission, and leadership, conferred with broader input, is respectful of others' gifts and ministries." "It will complete the process of moving from a pyramid to a koinonia (communion) church, with a better balance between male and female spiritualities and influence, greater female representation in decision making; there will be married priests and communion with one another across the earth, those gone before and those to come after." "It will stress the wisdom tradition rather than the intellectual, retrieve the mystical and return to a more holistic spirituality." "It will see a new priesthood within and among the people, a common communion in ministry." "It will move closer to a male-female partnership, a real balance of male-female cooperation and ministry."
After these quotations, the handout has these comments from Father Schmit: "Although these predictions by Fr. Bausch may not be realized as of yet, or as quickly as one might hope, nevertheless they should inspire and move all who minister for Jesus in the daily grind that is our human existence."
According to Helen, Father Schmit's teachings are very well received because, as she put it, many in the parish want to "get away from the authoritarian church" and have "lay people making decisions."
Another handout contained a "psalm," titled, "Do This in Memory of Me," from a book, Psalms for Zero Gravity by Edward Hays (Forest of Peace Publishing). The psalm begins: "Beloved Jesus, Lord of the Meal, I rejoice that a mother and a father, laboring for their family, begin and end each day's work saying, 'This is my body, this is my blood.' An adult child nursing a sick elderly parent with compassion and patient care says 'This is my body, this is my blood.'" The "psalm" then lists a preacher, a singer "forgetting self and the audience, making love out of the music," an artist, teacher, dancer, doctor, auto mechanic, office worker -- and all in their work say, "This is my body, this is my blood." In the last verse of the psalm, we learn that "ten thousand thousand consecrations occur daily, as all heaven's angels chime in, 'Holy, holy, holy,' to the thunderous praise of a thousand silent, silver bells. Listen. Listen."
Father Schmit's handout explains the "psalm" in the following "reflection": "Some theologians as late as the twelfth century held that there was no necessary connection between the consecration of bread and wine into Christ's Body and Blood and sacramental ordination. Gary Macy, chairman of the theology department of the University of San Diego and a scholar of the medieval period, discovered that the first document making a distinction between laity and ritually ordained clergy didn't appear until the Fourth Lateran Council of 1215."
Schmit's explanation continues: "To frequently make a gift of yourself in loving compassionate service is being faithful to Jesus, keeping the memory of his gift alive and doing what he did. While his gift-words are officially restricted to the ordained clergy today, Jesus' last request on the night before he died was restricted to neither time nor place, person nor circumstance. We all are called at every moment to live out that request."
I called St Anne's several times to ask Father Schmit to comment for this article. No one returned my calls.
Good; you're on the right track. Now think some more. Why is nudity frowned upon? Because after the Fall it's inextricably mixed up with mankind's dis-integrated condition, especially with respect to sexuality. Nakedness in the fallen world thus becomes a condition uniquely appropriate to marriage -- not just because it's more or less necessary, but because it images the trust that should exist between spouses. The fact that nudity's proper context has become nuptial is precisely why it's not inappropriate in a crucifix, so long (as I observed in the stupidly-deleted post that kicked off this sorry display) as both laity and clergy have had a wholesome spiritual formation. As this lamentable thread shows, that formation is rare in the extreme.
I agree with your point about nakedness and the fall, nakedness and marital intimacy, but the saints are depicted as wearing white garments and wedding garments in the bible, and I prefer my Jesus and saints clothed if it is all right with you. The nakedness of the cross was an anomaly, a gross humiliation of Jesus. To this day, a mark of humiliation (not the gracious kind of humility, the other kind) is to force captives to disrobe, and preferably parade them before the public where more often than not, scorn is heaped upon them solely because of their naked condition.
If people want Jesus naked, that is their choice.
Exactly! Because they're at the Lamb's Wedding Feast! And Ephesians 5 tells us in detail that the Lamb of God has the Church for his spouse.
I prefer my Jesus and saints clothed if it is all right with you.
Careful with the "my Jesus" talk. Jesus is the Truth; he's not something we construct to meet our expectations and be emotionally congenial. He's a sign of contradiction, as the Gospel says. If he's not rocking your world, you don't know him.
The nakedness of the cross was an anomaly, a gross humiliation of Jesus.
You realise of course that none of this could have happened unless Jesus had consented to every jot and tittle. That fact that the Son of David (like David before him) was naked was no accident. It was his choice, precisely because it was meant to convey a profound truth.
The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.
Amazing, how irregardless of denomination, the nakedness of Christ is seen as immodest when it should be seen as victory. It is the very nakedness of Christ that clothes us.
Reconciling man to God in a way that cancels out Adam's "I was afraid", and unfolding the meaning of the paschal salutation and existential vocation to "BE not afraid."
I don't know about St Joseph, but there have been depictions of Mary which used to be considered holy enough for the churches, but got thrown out in the 19th century. In the south of France, ancient statues of the Virgin Mary in childbirth were destroyed, and those of her breastfeeding were hidden away.
Personally, I don't like nudity in art, especially religious art. But there is a long tradition of it in very celebrated religious places. Maybe it helps to look at images as always being symbolic.
If they were, they've been brought out again. The Vatican Museum displays a breastfeeding Madonna dell'Umilta by Francescuccio Ghissi, and the Lateran Pinacoteca features a Madonna del Latte by Giovanni di Pietro.
That may be the reality but it also shows that utter lack of respect some people hold for our Lord Jesus. And THAT’S the reality.
If John didn't cover his nakedness, I would have.
Truly, as we take dominion and subdue the earth we stand before God clothed with the nakedness of Christ and without shame.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.