|
Published: November 20, 2009
An Important Change
Editors of CalCatholic respond to reader complaints, change title of new “Masses Worth Driving To” feature
After several complaints by our readers regarding our new feature, “Masses Worth Driving To,” the editors of California Catholic Daily have decided to change the name to “Churches Worth Driving To.”
On Nov. 4, California Catholic Daily announced the new feature under the headline “A Mass Worth Driving To.” The announcement noted, “Any valid Mass is infinitely worthwhile. But the human elements of a Mass vary. The editors of California Catholic invite readers to provide information on churches of their choice…”
Since the inception of the feature, California Catholic Daily has received valuable responses from its readers concerning the item. The central objection to the feature was over the issue of “Masses,” since, as noted in the original announcement, “any valid Mass is infinitely worthwhile.”
In response to these legitimate complaints, the title of the feature was changed to focus on churches instead of Masses, so that our readers may still submit items about churches without the implication that some valid Masses are more worthwhile than others.
California Catholic Daily invites readers to continue making submissions featuring Catholic churches in California and will continue to pay $50 for any item approved for publication.
Our homepage has been changed to reflect the new title in the clickable buttons on the left side of the page that link readers to archives of “Churches Worth Driving To” and to the submissions section, which provides guidelines to readers who want to submit an item about a church they think is “worth driving to.”
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 5:59 AM By St. Christopher
California Catholic Daily was correct initially in having the "Mass Worth Driving To" column. Many Catholic theologians agree -- including those within the Vatican -- that serious questions are raised by "Clown Masses" and the "Make It Up As You Go" mass, particularly given what is necessary to have a valid, licit mass. The post-Vatican II experimentation may be coming to an end, and upcoming changes in the language used at the Novus Ordo mass will help, but your change appears to reflect political decision-making. Put another way, if it is not a "Mass Worth Driving To," then all you are doing is expressing personal preference, not something of theological value, of a greater grace, or something that may assist in salvation. This is a shame -- "Churches Worth Driving To" -- is this like "Sunset" magazine, or "Southern Living" where you will see architecture that is more appealing. Your courage in stepping forward to show what a "Mass Should Be" was commendable. This change is a most important one, and is fundamentally wrong.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 6:41 AM By JLS
It was the Novus Ordo Mass that led me to the traditional Mass. When I was received into the Church, and for some years after that, I was not aware of the traditional Mass. What I was aware of was the need to continue searching for something in the way of liturgy. But once I discovered the traditional Mass, this need ended. Jesus tells us we need not only the "bread" but "every word that comes forth from the mouth of God": Most novus ordo parishes I've attended fail to preach sufficiently. Notwithstanding, yet there is further "lack" in the n.o. liturgy, which might not be evident to those who spend a lot of time in additional prayer practices. But the traditional liturgy seems sufficient in its "word" dimension. Yet, I've not been to a traditional Mass where there was lack of sufficient preaching. Thus, it is the priest and bishop who have to own up to their obligation before God to supply "every word that proceeds from the mouth of God" along with the "bread". This I would say is the major and grave fault and/or sin that goes along especially with the novus ordo Mass ... kind of perhaps a mockery by omission if not worse in some cases.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 7:48 AM By Robert Lockwood
Sorry, but I think you were correct in the first place. If the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is done in such a manner that you come out insensed and wondering where you could go elsewhere because of the way the Mass is presented - which is all too frequent - then we are talking about the "Mass" not the Church. At some "Churches" one Mass will be presented in a manner that you will never return and some Masses are inspiring. I think you have made a mistake changing this.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 8:20 AM By junev
I really enjoyed the article on St. Stephen the First Martyr in Sacramento. I attend this parish.
I am hoping this endeavor may help me to find a Latin Mass in the Stockton Diocese other than just the one in Turlock. As far as I know this is the ONLY Latin Mass in the diocese. Sure do hope someone out there can assist me. I contacted the diocese once but they didn't know of any Latin Masses and apparently didn't care.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 8:49 AM By VirgoPotens
I think some readers may have misinterpreted the original intention. Yes, if it is Sunday and you must fulfill your obligation, then indeed, ANY valid Mass is worth driving to in a literal sense. But I took the headline to refer to Masses that are worth DRIVING to. You know, driving for a long time and going out of your way. I was going to write about the Latin Mass at my parish, but we share that parish with Novus Ordo Masses, and frankly, I can't recommend them. Life Teen? "Extraordinary" ministers of the Eucharist walking all over the altar? Communion in the hand? Homilies that start with 10 jokes and dodge the tough moral issues? On the whole, it's not a church worth driving a long way to.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 9:19 AM By JLS
Have they come up with an "automatic mass" yet, like "automatic" writing, which is a few clicks beyond "stream of consciousness" writing?
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 9:39 AM By Barbara
You were right in the first place.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 9:45 AM By Jo Ann
I often travel to other areas to visit family. I was delighted to see a feature that might point me in the direction of a "reverent" Mass to attend. More often than not, if I have no other option than to go to a Novus Ordo Mass, I have had to "escape" as soon as possible. With a "catholic" ( small 'c') Church 10 minutes away, why do I choose to drive an hour or more? Because I am attending the Sacrifice on Calvary, represented, not a "Community Meal", and I am receiving the most intimate of all Gifts, His Body and Blood. I can remain after Mass to pray in thanksgiving, with no conversation or distractions. I am not interested in visiting a "building/ Church", especially where there in not even a tabernacle visible. I can do that in thousands of Protestant "churches'.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 9:51 AM By Dan
Is the Mass the sacrifice of Cavlary re-presented in on the altar through the priest, who is the "alter Cristus?" Because around where I live, it's "welcome to our celebration" and were it not for the words of the eucharistic prayer: "we pray your angel may take this sacrifice to your altar in heaven..." (which isn't used very often) there would be little said or done by the priests --and nothing by the singers and modern catholic hymnody-- to indicate that the Mass is the sacrifice of Christ. So yes, I think the original title was appropriate.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 9:51 AM By Maryanne Leonard
I am one Catholic who makes it a point to go to different churches all the time, on Saturdays, Sundays and throughout the week, and I gladly drive an hour or more to do that. Although I do have favorite churches to which I return, the range of experience at different churches and different Masses is amazing. You can see that to some extent by watching Mass celebrated on television as well, but the inner experience of worship is the same for me anywhere and anytime. It is often galling to see some of the local activities; for example, at one church, the priest invited all believers to take communion, stating that it didn't matter if they were Protestant or of no particular faith, which I found stunning. There really is a difference in churches and in Masses, and of course in priests, but God is eternal.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 10:01 AM By Willi H
Once upon a time, around forty years or so ago, the Church had Masses that were reverent, solemn, and uniform. You could go to the nearest Catholic church or to a church on the other side of the world, and it would be the same Mass. Then came Vatican II. And the Mass was changed. The old Mass was supressed and went into the catacombs. In the beginning of the Traditionalist Movement, Mass locations were few and far between. These were the original Masses/ churches worth driving to. People commited to Catholic Tradition sometimes travelled a couple of hours each Sunday to worship as their forbearers did. They sacrificed time, energy and money to go to Mass. Now people show up for the half hour new Mass in flip-flops and shorts without any thought what is supposed to be occuring at the Altar!
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 10:16 AM By The Truth Hurts
Thank-you CCD, In spite of the criticism for at least *trying* to help Catholics find parishes that won't cause people to stop going to Church altogether. I would imagine that there was quite a great flack due to some posts that said that certain Orders didn't have to answer to the Bishop. I'm sure there were quite a few behind the scene phone calls and emails that got the title change ball rolling. A Bishop has the authority and power to make an Order quite uncomfortable. Of course, we will never know about it until it finally comes out, which it always does because of God allowing it. I understand wanting to give the ultimate dignity and respect for the infinite value of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The problem is that in many churches there are serious abuses that have caused the faithful to question if that certain Mass was valid. I think that John Maguire's statement , "My objective is not to a comparative study of parish liturgies, skeptical though I am regarding how feasible such a study is." is more self-serving confusion without direction and an affront to pious ears who desire to end liturgical goofiness. Yes, it is always the right thing to defend the infinite value of the Mass but you can sometimes tell you are heading on the right track by the great opposition you receive when you are trying to accomplish something that is very pleasing to God. Now, if you really want to be clever as a serpent and affect change, how about "Churches That Are Receiving Record Size Donations For Having The Most Beautiful Reverential Masses?"
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 10:17 AM By Rick DeLano
As I said on the other thread, you guys never should have caved.
Dear heaven, Maguire will never cease policing you now.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 10:39 AM By John F. Maguire
This change is perhaps a mitigation but I would not hazard to say that it is anything more than a mitigation. All one need do is think the matter through. Since the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and just this Sacrifice, is the perfect form of worship that God the Father granted to us through His only-begotten Son, a Catholic *church* is always already, and first of all, that sacred site where this, and just this, Holy Sacrifice takes place. ~ I would add: From the multiform development of religion in world-history, we know that there is in the heart of man an immense striving for a true form of worship, which form of worship however can only be granted by God. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, then, is this, and just this, true and proper form of worship. ~ Masses, we know, can take place in soccer fields, school auditoriums, battle fields, prison cells, etc. but normally Masses are celebrated in churches. From within this perspective, the CCD editor's change is perhaps a mitigation of the problem if it is not also what might be called a compromise-formation.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 1:21 PM By Rick DeLano
See what I mean?
This is how the liberals hijacked the Council.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 1:42 PM By betty
I'm happy to see this subject treated. Here is my own experience. For many years I went to a traditional Mass in a neighboring town while my husband went to a "Clown" Mass in our own town, not because he liked it better. He referred to hmself as a missionary among the savages. I changed and started going to that Mass because I really enjoyed going to Mass with my husband. Things have gotten a little better but not completely. I complained to the pastor not because of his jokes told in the middle of the Mass but because people were standing and still stood while he told jokes although some of the elderly people were leaning on canes while they listened to his jokes. I asked one elderly man in front of me how he liked the joke and he said "What joke?" because he is totally deaf. After that the priest told shorter jokes which I suppose was an improvement.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 2:24 PM By WOODY GUIDRY
I'M SO OLD THAT I vividly and emotionally remember the first Mass I heard after Vatican ll changes. In the "good ole days" there were prayers called "secret"-only in the sense that they were inaudible-and were variable prayers said after the offertory and before the preface at Mass. Every "secret" had a corresponding collect and post-communion followed
with an "ekphonesis"-then the whole canon was so said: but it was not the only prayer in collect form that was not said or sung aloud. The point of the foregoing history is that all of my life until that first post-Vatican ll Mass, I had followed the canon silently as did the rest of the worshipers. The first time I joined the other lay people in saying the canon aloud together was the occasion of the only time I can remember weeping at Mass. Dear God! All those words came roaring out in a torrent of community none of us had experienced before. I knew then the value of change! But let me quickly
say that I have witnessed some horrific changes and looseness left to the discretion of local congregations and have hardly been able to finish Mass at some of them. I truly believe that there will inevitably be a standardization of all the modern "accidentals" to Mass. The Church seems slow a lot of the time, but it is STILL the Church.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 3:16 PM By The Truth Hurts
John Maguire, You state that this change is perhaps a mitigation or what might be called a compromise-formation?You have a lot of nerve. You have demonstrated ad nauseaum vocabularium that you, yourself, John Maguire, are a champion when it comes to compromising the faith. You defended the Professor of Compromise, Doug Kmiec. You defended a wishy washy compromise that it was no big deal for Catholics to vote for Obama. You compromised the truth and declared the mitigation of culpability of pro-choice voting Catholics because after all, we know that these many Catholic adults are just not smart enough to understand evil. You defended the anti-Catholic agenda word homophobic. You defended homosexual bloggers who attack Church Teachings with your silence. Once again you are showing that your objective is to cause confusion and criticize without direction. Using the word "mitigation", was a shabby attempt to give the false impression that CCD's initial title was so terrible that mankind hung in the balance unless you got your way. Sinful mankind does hang in the balance when we constantly choose to mitigate the the very destructive effects of mortal sin by compromise and silence.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 3:29 PM By WOODY GUIDRY
SEEMS ODD that at 3 p.m.(California time) nobody has commented in a manner worth posting since a little past 12.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 4:50 PM By Angelo
"Masses worth driving to" Became to myself a gift from God.
But now "Churches worth driving to" Is a big turn-off. This change sounds very much like the Post Vatican ll Church where everything has to be compromised. Because of a few complainers, CCD must now do like the Bishops of the silly season of the church. That is cave in to satisfy a few. And abandoned the rest of us. Like all Post Vatican ll innovations this change is doomed to failure. Goodbye, "Masses worth driving too."
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 5:14 PM By John F. Maguire
TTH: (1) I rejected Ambassador Kmiec's support for a double-track solution to the question of the civil definition of marriage -- but I defended Kmiec's view that the Republican Party's position on abortion was crypto-abortocratic because -- in Romneyite, McCainite, and Palinite manner -- this "pro-life" position would return the abortion question to the states for a thumbs-up/thumbs-down state-legislative vote on the right to life of the preborn infant quite as if preborn infants had no prior common law right to life nor a prior Constitutional right to life in accord with an inclusive reading of the word "person". Outside of this point of agreement with Doug Kmiec, which point of agreement I've always militantly defended, my position on abortion and on marriage differs from Ambassador Kmiec's. (2) Regarding your attempt to ban the word homophobic from the lexicon, I've defended the use of the word homophobic (say, for example, in police work, as there is no other way to refer to certain criminal motives than to refer to "homophobic aggression"). I've protested its overbroad use to the prejudice of the moral order itself. I'll by-pass rehearsing my discussion of the legitimacy of the term heterophobia. BUT ONE MORE THING: There is NO INSTANCE of my defending ANY blogger who attacks Church teaching.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 5:32 PM By John F. Maguire
In further reply to TTH: All this errant talk about my conniving with sin -- doesn't it occur to you that inviting bloggers onto this site to bash liturgies in the blogosphere is to scandalize parishes or even entire dioceses? Doesn't it occur to you that the proper recourse for lit-complainants (I'm often one) is first to supplicate the pastor and then if need-be to supplicate his bishop? It doesn't occur to you that when a blogger is given space on this site to issue a UKASE against Catholics attending any Mass of the Novus Ordo in a (named bishop's) Diocese, that provision is objectively sinful because it facilitates a public derogation of the Eucharistic Christ, who after all is PRESENT in this same Diocese's Novus Ordo Masses, yes, in view of the fact that these Masses are valid Masses?
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 5:40 PM By JLS
Rick DL., I don't think they intend to think like they do, but that it's the way people who have no faith sound ... muddled, confused, incapable of connecting dots ... the best they've got to hang onto is emotion, and they seek the advice of those equipped better in this dept, which is why we're seeing the rise of feminism and liberalism at the same time ... they go together like horse and carriage, but without a driver.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 5:57 PM By Angelo
Woody Guidry, You say that no one has posted a comment worth posting. By the rules of California Catholic Daily, we cannot post personel attacks. Thats what protects Maguire. He can subtely attack others. But we cannot say what we really think about his posts. Until we learn his Gente Non Sancta tactics.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 7:24 PM By Maryanne Leonard
Yes, Woody, I understand what you mean. There is so much personal attack here, and on a site that is meant to be a place for Catholics to communicate about things that mean a great deal to us. Well, at least everybody seems passionate about their positions. Better we should care than not care about matters pertaining to our faith. But with the superior educations that most of us had courtesy of the Catholic Church, you'd think we'd have learned how to debate issues without attacking one another personally. I say let's leave each other alone for the rest of the day and go find some Protestants to pick on instead.
|
Posted Friday, November 20, 2009 8:52 PM By cjo
Just in case you may not be aware, Coalition in Support of Ecclesia Dei maintains a list of all traditional masses throughout the USA ..and even those [few] in California ..
They can be contacted at 847-724-7151 or-
PO Box 2071, Glenview, Illinois 60025-6071.
|
Posted Saturday, November 21, 2009 11:50 AM By margie
Frankly, I am surprised at all the buzz. I took the article at its face value and noted that St. Stevens offers a wonderfully reverential worship of our God. This is a good thing.
Let's argue about how many angels are on the head of a pin. I love Jesus and I love to see Him honored and glorified. Are you with me? If you are not against me, you are with me. Amen.
|
Posted Saturday, November 21, 2009 1:08 PM By John F. Maguire
In reply to the CCD Editor: What is the Mass? The Mass is the very same Sacrifice as Christ's Sacrifice on Calvary, now offered unbloodily. At Mass, Christ as Second Person in the Blessed Trinity AND Christ in his Sacred Humanity offers up in adoration this one and same Sacrifice as the very same Sacrifice -- his ownmost Sacrifice on Calvary ~ Mr. Editor, I stress here "Christ in his Sacred HUMANITY" because the formulation of the Mass in your statement (above) sharply counterposes divine elements and "human elements" in the Mass, quite as if the only HUMAN elements were those of Christ's priests and not indeed the Sacred HUMANITY of Christ himself. But it is on account of this Sacred Humanity, and precisely on account of this Sacred Humanity, that the Mass as Holy Sacrifice is offered at all. ~ "Any valid Mass is infinitely worthwhile," you write. That's true -- profoundly true. But then you write: "But the human elements of the Mass vary." (1) If your talking about the priest-celebrants of the Mass, the attendant "human elements" cannot "vary" substantially in regard to these priests' employment of proper matter and proper form at the Consecration nor proper intention in keeping with the intention of the Church. These "elements" cannot vary substantially, else no Mass will take place. But the real problem involves another consideration: (2) This divide of yours between (a) divine elements in the Mass and (b) human elements in the Mass (which "vary") scants the fact the it is INVARIABLY Christ in his sacred HUMANITY who offers up the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass -- Christ, that is, as Sovereign Priest in relation to whom his sacerdotal priests celebrate the Mass cooperatively and representatively, that is, as co-offerors with Him in the one and same Sacrifice as Calvary, now offered unbloodily.
|
Posted Saturday, November 21, 2009 1:29 PM By John F. Maguire
The word "homophobia" is not always an anti-Catholic agenda word. Likewise, the word "heterophobia" is not always an anti-Catholic agenda word, despite the fact that Wilhelm Reich, for one, falsely charged pro-lifers with an
"unconscious" fear of the hetero-genital embrace on sheer account of pro-lifers being pro-lifers! Obviously, then, we encounter ideologically abuses of these two terms, but that fact, by itself, does not disqualify these two terms tout court -- certainly not when these terms are used properly and accurately.
|
Posted Saturday, November 21, 2009 2:18 PM By John Maguire
No review of current "phobia" terms would be complete without reference to Christophobia. There is a certain generalized Christophobia throughout today's mass media/culture-industry but I am referring to something more specific namely: Christophobic aggression in its social and physical senses -- I mean, attacks on Christian sacred sites and sacred architecture; deliberate misstatements of Christian teaching; false-light misreporting; attacks on Catholic priests precisely as Christ's representatives (for example, for their refusal to sign the gender-neutralist manifesto entitled "Declaration of Religious Support for Marriage Equality"; etc.). Here as elsewhere, it should be added that there is a difference between the common-parlance use of the term "phobia" and various clinico-psychological uses of the term.
|
Posted Saturday, November 21, 2009 3:52 PM By Angelo
All Catholic Churches with Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament present, are worth driving to. But when one has a choice. Not all masses are worth making an extra effort to drive to, or plan a visit to. "Masses Worth Driving To" is what made this new feature in California Catholic Daily interesting.
|
Posted Sunday, November 22, 2009 2:26 PM By The Truth Hurts
John Maguire, Once again you are demonstrating that you are only interested in defending confusion without a direction. You were dissatisfied with the initial title so you voiced your opposition without offering a better suggestion to help the good intentions of CCD. Are you saying that the only noble causes that will solicit your defense comments are Professor Kmiec's compromise, the non-culpability of Catholics who voted for Obama and now your infamously defended word "homophobic"? When it comes to defending attacks on the Teachings of the Church or counseling the doubtful or the ignorant when they post you remain silent. I wonder what the wonderful outcome would be if you spent even 1/4 of your posting time charitably adhering to the Spiritual Works of Mercy? Yes, we are supposed to bear wrongs patiently. Yes, we are supposed to forgive all injuries but #1 on that list is to admonish sinners #2 Instruct the ignorant and #3 Counsel the doubtful. Instead of thanking CCD for humbly listening to the complaints and changing to a new title, you were comfortable to let everyone know that "perhaps" it is a mitigation. Well, perhaps it is time to instruct and counsel the bloggers who post error and dissent. Also, John for many ,many years Catholics have taken the proper course and spoken to their pastor and their Bishop. Nothing improved so people left. We should all care about that and I believe CCD was just doing what Bishop Fulton Sheen recommended. Helping the laity by first remaining faithful to the Magisterium and by being the eyes and the ears and the voices to ensure that our Masses remain reverent. I do believe that there is much truth to what Angelo and Rick DeLano posted above. This is the subtle way to keep the status quo of confusion. Jesus said, "Love one another as I have loved you". John you asked CCD to change a title so now I am asking you to change and instruct. Do not leave the difficult share of the gospel for only a few to bear.
|
Posted Sunday, November 22, 2009 3:36 PM By John F. Maguire
Genuine appreciation of the Liturgy of the Mass of the Ages and its perennial Calendar requires the attentiveness of an open heart. I'm convinced by Wendy Wright that Caryll Houselander (1901 - 1954) possessed just such a heart.
"Houselander was acutely attentive to the primal rhythm of the divine discernible in the Liturgy and echoed in the events of every day. Her attentiveness was a contemplative practice in the sense that she approached all of life as a mystery to be plumbed, not a puzzle to be solved." Guided
by Smith, we find Caryll Houselander -- in 1941 -- writing these words: "The supreme expression on earth of the rhythmic law of God is the Liturgy." As an artist and poet in wartime England, Houselander explains her meaning in artistic terms: "The poet is loved by his fellow men because he gives them a voice; he gives words to the dumb love of the world and sings its song. The priest at the altar lifts the world's voice above the world to the feet of God." Still, the Liturgy is much more than the song of the world; "it is the love-song of Christ in man; the voice of the Mystical Body of Christ lifted up to God." See Wendy Smith, editor and commentator, _Caryll Houselander: Essential Writings_ (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2005), p. 125. Caryll Houselander's discussion of the Liturgy can be found in her book, _The War is the Passion_ (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1941), pp. 102-8.
|
Posted Sunday, November 22, 2009 3:42 PM By victoriag
I agree with Angelo. This isn't a Broadway Show Catholics are attending, where one expects to be entertained. We went to Church out of our Love for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. This need by Church Officials to "entertain" the Laity all started with Vatican II, Guitar Masses and the stripping our Parish Churches of everything that made up Our Catholic Identity.
|
Posted Monday, November 23, 2009 11:47 AM By John F. Maguire
Who, it might be asked, has eyes to see what the Liturgy of the Mass of the Ages is? ~ I've mentioned -- as one such person -- Caryll Houselander. Here, by way of exemplifying the spirit of her vision, is Caryll Houselander's account of the Liturgy for Holy Saturday. (Her account dates from 1944.) "Here in this grey London street a young priest stands at the door of the church celebrating the age-long ceremonies of age-less love. He lights the incense in the silver censer, and a little blue cloud of adoration rises to God. He goes with his acolytes (an old man too old for war and a child who is too young) in grave procession to the altar." [....] "All round the church are ruins -- ruins of the home, ruins of the heart, ruins of the dreams of men. And everywhere there are those who propose to build a new world on the foundation of ruins. Everywhere, those who plan the Kingdom of God to the scale and mind of man. Only the priest has no plan. He is a sower, sowing seeds of fire in the furrow ploughed for sowing by sorrow. He lights a flame in the heart of man, in the name and the power of God." C. Houselander, "Holy Saturday -- 1944," in _Essential Writings_, selected with commentary by Wendy M. Wright (Maryknoll, New York: Orbis Books, 2005), pp. 115 - 117.
|
© California Catholic Daily 2009. All Rights Reserved.
|