Letters: Sunday Mass

The
Catholic Weekly
Online

Sydney
4 April 2004

ACU honours Bishop Robinson

Fight secularism, Pope tells bishops

Mass remembers Cardinal Thuan

ACU National says ‘no’ to HECS fee rise

On the frontline

Pregnant pause: It’s so enjoyable, I’m not sure that I want the waiting to end

La Perouse remembers Fr Receveur

‘Tony Abbott is right’

Liturgy Corner: Why do we bless ourselves with holy water?

Liquor outlet threat

Editorial: Good report

Letters: Sunday Mass

Conversation: Former Test batsman Rick McCosker - Cricket hero was a ‘closet Catholic ...’

Caring face of Vinnies

Keep smiling and God bless: Real news is Good News

New textbooks win praise from schools, parents

‘Auntie Paul’ – Mercy’s mistress of the Mater

Ellen Geary’s journey from ‘Irish’ town of Tumut

To Mass in the Colosseum

Record start for young swim star

Letters: Sunday Mass

The instances of lack of sportsmanship in school sport may point to a more fundamental problem (Let sportsmanship live, Letters CW 28/3).

When the Pope met the Australian Catholic Bishops last week, he spoke of the danger of letting the focus of sport and entertainment replace the Sunday observance of Holy Mass.

The Holy Father said: “When Sunday loses its fundamental meaning and becomes subordinate to a secular concept of ‘weekend’ dominated by such things as entertainment and sport, people stay locked within a horizon so narrow that they can no longer see the heavens.”

How many of our own schools keep Sunday Mass in mind when organising weekend activities, especially sporting ones?

An early start on a Sunday for an all-day sports carnival is hardly going to encourage young people to remain faithful to the celebration of Sunday Mass.

Perhaps they get to the vigil Mass or to a Sunday evening Mass? I hope they do.

It would be a good deal more prudent and practical if organisers of school sports underlined for students, parents and teachers the need to put their obligation to God first.

In a country where sport has become a pseudo-religion, we should take to heart the Pope’s words: “The Lord himself continues to beckon his people with a love which challenges and calls.”

Anthony English
Denistone East, NSW

GOSPELS COME TO LIFE

Having just seen The Passion of the Christ, I fail to understand the criticism regarding the portrayal of the Jewish race.

What the Jews did through the Pharisees to Jesus 2000 years ago has no bearing on how I feel about present day Jews, any more than what the Germans or Japanese did in World War II has on my feelings for Germans and Japanese today.

There is no doubt it was the Jews, through the Pharisees, who gave Jesus up to be crucified.

After all, they were the ones who paid Judas the 30 pieces of silver.

The Roman soldiers who tortured and crucified Jesus were acting under orders from Pilate, who merely carried out the wishes of the crowd, who were once again led and exhorted by the Pharisees to demand that Jesus be crucified and that Barrabas be freed.

If, in fact, the story was not told in the way it is, the film would not be portraying the truth, and then obviously some critiscism would be justified.

As for the graphic details of the scourging, way of the cross and crucifixion, it’s about time someone was both honest and game enough to give some impression of what Jesus really went through, as an innocent man, to give us a chance to get to Heaven.

In summary, this film has done the same for me as my visit to the Holy Land. It has helped fill in details and makes the Gospels come to life.

Thank you for the “new look” Catholic Weekly, every home should have one.

Frank Burgess
Engadine, NSW

ALLEGORY OF MASS?

I wonder if Roy J O’Neill MSC (Flawed, Letters CW 28/3) and I saw the same film.

I hate movies, and I went to see The Passion of the Christ more out of a sense of duty than anything else, fully expecting to be bored.

I wasn’t bored. I was riveted to my seat throughout, unable to take my eyes off the screen.

The film is full of marvellous Catholic symbolism, the most striking of which is the sudden cut from Jesus saying the words of institution at the Last Supper to Him being raised high on the cross.

It made me wonder whether Gibson intended the entire film as some sort of elaborate allegory of the Mass.

I fully intend to see it again.

Lance Eccles
Haberfield, NSW

WORKING OF HOLY SPIRIT?

We are so fortunate at this time to share in a small way in Christ’s suffering and humiliation, an uncomfortable position to be put in for some.

We have at our disposal a film which makes us feel we are there, giving us a closer look at the events Jesus truly underwent in all their brutality. His Mother Mary had to witness and suffer this also.

From the various comments, interestingly enough, in all instances, this film seems to bring out a reaction to match the level of faith and lack of it.

Jesus can see our hearts like the few Roman soldiers who were converted that day.

Similarly, the film is igniting those passive Christians who want to reform – no doubt the working of the Holy Spirit.

Who can say for sure His last hours did not take place like that? Jesus experiences similar conceit now at the hands of those who don’t think He suffered so much.

If this is the conduit that bears fruit, then we need it today.

Time we knew that hell is real and that the devil is alive and well.

Jesus hasn’t stopped using every means to reveal truths and inspire us ever since the Book was written. However he could only work with those open to him.

Patricia Barry
Kenthurst, NSW

ENGLISH TEXTS

In the light of the Second Vatican Council’s “The body of the faithful as a whole, anointed as they are by the Holy One, cannot err in matters of faith” (Lumen Gentium # 12), and of Cardinal Newman’s On consulting the faithful on matters of doctrine (1859), it might not be a bad idea to consult the laity on English Mass texts, such as the responses and the Gloria, which we have been using for over 30 years and which we know by heart.

Michael Mann
Heathcote, NSW

TRANSLATION

We certainly hope for a new English translation that will be “elegant” (Bishops study new Mass text, CW 7/3). One must applaud the correcting of some of the “improvements” and references missed by the current version.

However, a true translation is more than rendering Latin words into (mostly) English words. (“It is right and just” does not even do that. Authentic English usage is, surely, part of the vernacular envisaged by the Council.

Your article mentions the Creed returning to “I believe ... the original Latin”. In fact, the original was the assembled bishops at Nicea and later Constantinople together speaking out their faith, the Church’s Faith: Credimus (or the Greek equivalent), “we believe”. When inserted in Oriental liturgies soon after, it was naturally spoken still in the plural. It was changed to Credo, “I believe”, when spoken by individuals being baptised.

By the 11th century when it was added to the Roman Mass, the Latin was out of the reach of a congregation so that in effect the priest celebrant was stating his faith and the (individual’s) Baptismal formula was used. If it is to be acclaimed by all, surely it ought be the original plural number – even in Latin.

J Woods
Scone, NSW