The Law of Fasting & Abstinence

Today being Good Friday, Catholics of the Latin Rite are called to fasting and abstinence in observing the penitential nature of this day.  (Catholics of the Eastern Churches generally have their own rules on fasting and abstinence.)  However, the two requirements--fasting and abstinence--do not bind everyone in the same way.  A short discussion of the two:

Abstinence.  This binds only Catholics who have completed their fourteenth year, i.e., those who are 14 years old and older.  Those under 14 years old may have meat this day.  In his 1966 document Paenitemini, Pope Paul VI clarified the contours of fasting and abstinence.  Although superseded by the 1983 Code of Canon Law in many ways, it can be useful in providing interpretive guidance.  By abstinence  we mean those bound must abstain from the eating of meat, which has historically not included fish and other sea animals.  Paul VI said that: "The law of abstinence forbids the use of meat, but not of eggs, the products of milk or condiments made of animal fat."

Fasting.  This only binds those who have reached the age of majority until the beginning of their sixtieth year.  That is, only those between the ages of 18 and 59 are bound to the obligation to fast on Good Friday.  How much does this mean we are permitted to eat?  Pope Paul VI indicated: "The law of fasting allows only one full meal a day, but does not prohibit taking some food in the morning and evening, observing—as far as quantity and quality are concerned—approved local custom."

The Pope, Washing Feet, and Law

I was asked about the question of the Washing of the Feet and the Pope's decision to wash the feet of 2 young women on Holy Thursday.  There seems to be some great confusion on this, which to my lawyer's mind seems to be based in some misunderstandings about law generally and liturgical law specifically.

Before I begin, just a few caveats.  First, I do not believe there is some unchanging theological necessity that limits the washing of feet to 12 men.  In other words, I do not have any theological problem to the washing of women's feet on Holy Thursday.  As for the symbolism of the action, I tend to think that it is best expressed when the Diocesan Bishop washes the feet of 12 of his priests, but that's just my personal view.  However, as I will explain below, I do believe that limiting the washing of feet to men is the current law, and that generally we should have a spirit of obedience to the law, especially in regards the liturgy.  Nonetheless, proper authority certainly has the right to change this, but should it be changed it ought to be done in a way proper to the promulgation of law.

First, some background on the liturgical instructions.  As most Catholics know, on Holy Thursday priests are permitted (but not required) to include in the Mass of the Lord's Supper the liturgical action known as the Mandatum.  This is the washing of the feet in in imitation of Christ's own example, as recounted in the thirteenth chapter of John's Gospel.  There Christ tells his Apostles:

You call me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another's feet. For I have given you an example, that you also should do as I have done to you. 

John 13:13-15

In the current liturgical books, the Church permits the washing of the feet of twelve men.  In the Latin this is very clear, the text uses the word "vir"--meaning men specifically--and not "homo", meaning man generally (i.e., human beings).  There is no ambiguity in the liturgical rubric, if the Mandatum is done in the liturgy it is to be done with 12 men.  

Keep in mind, however, that this liturgical action is not a Sacrament, nor even a sacramental.  That is, it is not the vehicle for grace the way baptism is.  When water is poured over the head of a child and the words of baptism said, it effects a change in the child more than his just getting wet.  The symbolism of the pouring of water and saying of words is, in effect, the vehicle for God's salvific grace.  In this, God mandates not only the grace that is given, but the means through which it comes.  For this reason, the Church recognizes that she cannot change the symbol (the pouring water and the words) any more than she can change the grace that flows from it.  This is decidedly not the case with the washing of feet.  This action is just symbolic, it effects no grace by the working of the action itself, as sacraments do.  It only effects a change in that the viewer is stirred to reflect on the action of Christ in seeing it symbolically reenacted in the context of the Liturgy.  Thus, the Church is far freer in adapting the symbol to suit changes in time, place, and custom.

In regards to the changeable elements of the liturgy, who has the authority over it?  The Second Vatican Council made that abundantly clear in the document Sacrosanctum Concilium, the first Constitution issued by the Council Fathers:

Regulation of the sacred liturgy depends solely on the authority of the Church, that is, on the Apostolic See

Sacrosanctum Concilium 22 

That is, the Pope--and the Pope alone--has authority over the sacred liturgy.  He normally does that by promulgating the liturgical books.

Is the Pope bound to the authority of the liturgical books?  Yes, but remember that he also has the power of dispensation.  There are things in the liturgy which are unchangeable--the use of bread and wine, for example--which not even the Pope can derogate from.  But for the others--"merely ecclesiastical laws"--the Pope may dispense anyone from them.  So, for example, before the Second Vatican Council, to say Mass a priest had to have use of his thumb and index finger to hold the host.  The Jesuit Priest--now saint--Isaac Jogues had his fingers removed by the Mohawk Indians then living in Canada, whom he was trying to evangelize.  The Pope at the time dispensed him from that liturgical law so that he might continue to say Mass.

The Code of Canon law allows a legitimate authority to dispense from any "merely ecclesiatical law":

Can. 85 A dispensation, that is, the relaxation of a merely ecclesiastical law in a particular case, can be granted, within the limits of their competence, by those who have executive power, and by those who either explicitly or implicitly have the power of dispensing, whether by virtue of the law itself or by lawful delegation.

As a general rule, in the law one who has the power to dispense others has the power to dispense himself, unless explicitly prohibited from doing so.  Here, the Pope clearly has the power to dispense from the rule that the washing of the feet be limited to men.  In fact, he is the only authority with the power to do so, as the law explicitly reserves the regulation of the Sacred Liturgy to him.  Since he has the power to dispense others, he can dispense itself.

Therefore, those who say the Pope somehow acted illicitly by washing the feet of women on Holy Thursday are simply wrong.  He has the legal authority to do so, and such an action is completely legitimate.

Now, what about everyone else?  A well known Catholic writer issued on Twitter this comment:  "The question of whether a priest can wash women's feet on Holy Thursday now seems answered. Pope Francis will do this today in a prison."  To the extent that this was an assertion that any priest may now ignore the rubric limiting the washing of feet to men, this is simply wrong and misunderstands the nature of law.

The whole point of "dispensation" is that it derogates from the law in a particular instance.  Law, on the other hand, is something of general applicability.  Part of the very definition of law is that it must be promulgated by one in authority if it has general effect.  To state otherwise would be to say that every dispensation actually changed the law for everyone.  That would be chaos.  The orderly functioning of any society requires a consistent and coherent set of laws, and a clear delineation of what binds and what does not.

To conclude, Pope Francis was certainly not acting "illegally" by washing the feet of two women on Holy Thursday night in the juvenile prison in Rome.  At the same time, the Pope did not change the rubric for anyone else, only for himself on that one Holy Thursday.

If pastors--or Bishops--earnestly believe that there is great spiritual advantage to be had by changing the rule, their course is clear.  We are a hierarchical Church that, especially with regards to the liturgy, looks to those who have been given the special charge of preserving that liturgy.  Any priest, any Bishop, and even an entire Conference of Bishops, needs simply to petition the Apostolic See for a dispensation of the rule, or request its amendment.  Until then, the law should be followed.

7 Churches on Holy Thursday

There is an ancient Roman tradition of visiting the altars of seven churches on Holy Thursday night.  This is actually pretty easy to do in a city of 900 churches.  After the Mass of the Lord's Supper on Holy Thursday evening, the last Mass before the Easter Vigil on Saturday night, the Blessed Sacrament is reserved in a side chapel or altar.  The Mass of the Lord's Supper commemorates especially the institution of the Eucharist, and the Church encourages devotion to the Blessed Sacrament on this day.  There is also a practical aspect--the Church often mixes the symbolic or devotional with the practical.  The altar needs to be stripped and the tabernacle emptied for the Good Friday liturgy. Over the years, the people and parishes added splendor to this, decorating the altar with candles, flowers, and beautiful cloths.  And so developed the custom, especially in Rome and then spreading to other cities, of visiting Christ in the Sacrament at a variety of different altars and churches.

The custom developed of visiting seven churches.  Why seven?  This is probably a confusion with another custom, that of visiting the seven pilgrimage churches of Rome when on pilgrimage there.  The visiting of these seven churches was often associated with a plenary indulgence.

There may have been an indulgence associated with the Holy Thursday custom of visiting churches, but there is no more.  Rather, the Church offers a plenary indulgence for the following in Holy Thursday:

A plenary indulgence is granted [under the normal conditions] for the faithful who piously recite the versus of the Tantum ergo after the Mass of the Lord's Supper on Holy Thursday during the solemn reposition of the Most Blessed Sacrament.

Here were the seven churches I visited this Holy Thursday here in Rome:

Gruyères, Switzerland

If you imagine in your mind a small Alpine village, I would guess that it would look much like the medieval town of Gruyères, about 30 miles from Fribourg.  It is also the town from which gruyère cheese--that perfect ingredient for the most Swiss of dishes, fondue--gets its name.  I went on an absolutely perfect day--still a bit of the winter cold, but by no means freezing.

It has a lovely little village church off the main square.  Like all Swiss churches, it is immaculately clean and well ordered.  Climbing up the hill, it has some incredible overlooks of valley and the Alpine mountains in the distance.

Here are a few of the pictures from Gruyères:

The Importance of Teachers

I am a product of Catholic education.  From 2nd to 8th grades, I attended St. Jerome Catholic School in Phoenix, AZ.  It was a relatively new parish at the time, in a fast-growing city.  I had a number of teachers I remember well, but two who stick out the most as having influenced me.  My 6th Grade and Social Studies teacher was Karen Stevens.  She was a phenomenal teacher who not only loved her students, but really respected them.  She taught me the importance of leadership, maturity, and responsibility.  

The other was a teacher who had been at the school for a while even when I was a student (nearly 30 years ago), my 8th grade and Math teacher, Rose Mischke.  She was the "cool" teacher, popular and friendly.  She nurtured in me a love for school, and the drive to do well at it.  She was tough, but you knew she cared about the students and the school.  The reason I mention all this is that I learned through my sister, who learned it through Mrs. Stevens (even after all these years, I don't think I could ever call her "Karen") that Ms. Mischke has decided to retire.  This is a woman who gave her life not just for education, not just for Catholic education, but Catholic education at St. Jerome school.  

Below is an article done last year by Our Sunday Visitor, profiling her commitment to education.  The story talks about the 8th grade adopting a family and the "Mexican Dinner" they put on to raise money for that family.  We did the very same thing when I was in 8th grade, and I am amazed that the tradition has continued so long.  

May God bless her in her retirement and may God bless all those who have committed themselves to Catholic education.

Longtime educator nurtures pupils’ spirits through service

On a recent Friday, teacher Rose Mischke and about 20 students from St. Jerome Catholic School in Phoenix, Ariz., got out of class early and spent four hours with two refugee families that they “adopted.” 

Teacher Rose Mischke and her students with one of the refugee families the class has adopted. Courtesy of Rose Mischke

They shopped for paper products and toiletries for the parents and five children from Iraq, played soccer with the teens and their father, and played games with the youngest kids. When the ice cream man came through the neighborhood, the students bought something for everybody. 

They also visited a family of parents and four kids from the Congo, who had spent 12 years in a refugee camp in Rwanda. When one student gave the mom a sack of potatoes, the woman hugged her. 

“Sometimes you feel like you’re Superman,” Mischke said. 

Those simple acts and more are part of the Catholic spirit that she nurtures in her students at St. Jerome, where she has an eighth-grade homeroom, teaches religion and teaches math to sixth-, seventh- and eighth-graders. Mischke, 62, has taught at the same school for 40 years. 

“The service work enriches the children’s lives and my main theme is about service,” she said. 

Mischke helps students to stage an annual Mexican dinner and accompanying raffle that last year raised $40,000 for the local St. Vincent de Paul Society. 

“Every year, the same people donate because they know it goes to good use. One guy gave us 200 pounds of cheese and 200 pounds of beans,” she said. “And the kids have to do the dinner themselves, so it’s really living their faith.” 

The school is involved with a parish project that collects and redistributes household items, toys and other goods that someone else can use. So there were things on hand one afternoon when Mischke encountered a homeless woman outside the school. When she said she had a job interview and needed help, Mischke sent her to the St. Vincent de Paul thrift store, but when Mischke went back inside the school, she realized that the shop was close to closing time. 

“I found some extra sheets, food products that people had donated, and within 10 minutes, my kids were running down the street trying to find this lady,” she said. 

They couldn’t, but they later found her praying in the chapel. 

“All of a sudden, she was there, and when they gave her all this stuff, she started crying,” she said. “These are the kinds of things that happen, and you can’t say it’s luck. I believe that everything happens for a purpose. We talk about how God closes one window and opens another.” 

She has seen how Catholic education influences what students can become. One girl founded a high school club to teach English to refugee families. Another went on to teach at a public school and organized his own Mexican dinner fundraiser to purchase eye glasses for needy students. 

“I know that this [service] is working,” she said. “They are taking what they learned here and carrying it into their formative years and their adult years. You can see how it carries on.” 

Mischke had an uncle who was a missionary priest, and an aunt was a nun who taught in Chicago. 

“I was born a Catholic, raised a Catholic, and my only desire was to teach in a Catholic school,” she said.

Fribourg, Switzerland

 One of the reasons I started this blog, as I've mentioned before, is to post pictures of places I visit in Europe for friends and family.  Because of my postings following the Pope's election, this blog has gotten a bit of a wider view than I had thought it would.  Still, it's a handy place to post pics.

The Canton of Fribourg in Switzerland is one of the historically Catholic Canton.  (A Canton is roughly--very roughly--the equivalent of a "State" in Switzerland.)  The Cantons are generally divided between those that went for Calvin and those that remained Catholic.  Fribourg, because of its location between two Calvinist Cantons, was not only Catholic but quite adamantly so.  This was probably exacerbated by the violence they suffered at the hands of their Calvinist neighbors.  They still have the custom on Corpus Christi of firing of the town's canons as a warning to those Protestants who might seek to disrupt the Eucharistic procession.

When the Canton of Fribourg built its University, it asked the Dominican Order to run the college of theology, which it does to this day.  In America, we would find it odd for a state university to have a theology faculty run by a religious order, but such things are far more acceptable here.  Currently, our Province of Dominicans has three priests studying theology in Fribourg.

I had planned for some time to go up and visit these brothers.  While in the midst of planning, Benedict XVI announced his retirement.  I decided to take the trip anyway, thinking (and hoping) it likely that the Conclave would not start until I returned.  I turned out to be correct, thank goodness, and returned to Rome the day before the Conclave began.

Like much of Western Europe, the religiosity of the people--both Catholic and Calvinist--had faded greatly.  Nevertheless, the majesty of the Catholic faith--the churches, shrines, monasteries, and statues--remains.  It is amazing to consider how far and how deeply the faith permeated the culture there.

Switzerland is a place of incredible natural beauty, and of great artistic beauty as well.  The pictures below are just from my time in Fribourg.  I plan to upload as well pictures from Gruyere and Lucerne as well.

The Secular Press and Religious Reporting

 The events of the last few weeks, with the resignation of Benedict XVI, the Conclave, and the election of Pope Francis, have put the Vatican in a spotlight.  The spotlight is provided in many ways by the international press corps.  As an English speaker, with at least a reading knowledge of Italian, I have been able to watch both the Italian press and the English-speaking (mostly American) secular press.  My general conclusion was how very, very bad the reporting was. 

On the other hand, there was some very good reporting from the religious press.  Now, I don’t mean simply that it was positive.  I certainly believe in an independent press, one that is willing to ask difficult questions and get to the heart of the story.  As much as I might find fault with the later reporting, much of the initial reporting of the abuse scandal in the U.S., as painful as it was as a Catholic to read, was not only good, but necessary.  What I mean is that the Catholic press was good at giving the full background and context of stories, so as to actually inform.

Thinking about it over the last few days, I decided to write up my impressions on the reporting I saw, and sometimes experienced, over these last several weeks.  My purpose for this is not merely to rant at the secular press—although I admit some satisfaction in that.  It is to help people to understand that you cannot take much of what is reported on the Catholic Church in the mainstream secular press at face value.  It does not mean everything they report is wrong, but they are increasingly like the boy who cried wolf, and it is hard to know what to believe and what not to believe.  A Catholic should balance his reading of Catholic issues in the news by some good solid religion reporters.

Below are what I see as some of the most significant flaws that surfaced in the reporting by the mainstream secular media, especially in the U.S.  I suppose if I had more time I could up with many more, although this is pretty long.