26 December 2010

What a difference a new Marini makes

There have been some rumblings in the Washington Post in recent days, rapidly relayed by Pray Tell (curiously, with closed comments), on the difference to papal liturgies under Monsignor Guido Marini since he was given responsibility for them by Pope Benedict in 2007, after twenty years of Archbishop Piero Marini's rule. The article is interesting, especially the grumpy remarks of the Archbishop.

Well, what a difference Mgr Marini has made! God bless him, and Pope Benedict! Pictures, as they say, are worth 1,000 words:

Pope John Paul II
24 December 1999

Austria, September 2007 

Austria, September 2007

Epiphany 2009

Easter 2010

Christmas 2010


  1. Yes - the pics speak for themselves. My hope and prayer is that more people, especially laity, directed to helpful sites like this one, NLM, WDTPRS, Chant Cafe, etc., will become better informed, formed and transformed by immersing themselves deep in history.

    Not to put too fine a point on the matter, but the sooner the heretics and self-loathing haters of beauty and authentic liturgy remove themselves from influence (...or are appropriately taken out of positions of authority), the better.

    May the Good Lord grant Msgr. Guido a long life, and may our leaders have the good sense to keep him around!

  2. Very interesting blog, but could you please correct the typo in your profile from 'demned' to damned - thanks and God bless your efforts.

  3. You are most kind to say so, anonymous sir. There is no typo. Older English, what! Much more fun.

  4. Beauty in worship is not a bad thing but when it is made an idol as seems the case with this Pope, it is no longer of the heart but simply superstition.

    The only heretics in this discussion IMHO are those that perpetuate a liturgy that mimics the superficiality of the Jerusalem temple observances that Jesus rejected.

    The pics indeed do say it all as does a preference for "old" English.

  5. Warren & Anonymous 29/11: "heretics" is too rash a charge here methinks. Not so sporting either.

    Anonymous 29/11: "icon" rather than "idol" methinks, good sir, with all the theological implications of the term. The Pimpernel envies your ability to read the Pope's heart and judge him guilty of superstition, but DNIC said something about doing that to others also. Oh, and one thing the pictures do say is that this pope is humble enough even to be paraded as a liturgical laughing stock by Archbishop Marini.

    Now, gentleman, enough of name-calling please. It's jolly ungentlemanly. There are rules for duels, at least in old English.

  6. I think you grant more to medieval worship traditions and trappings than they deserve. Such things are merely passing "signs of the time."

    Idol is the better word IMHO since icon suggests depth and legitimacy based on valid and relevant sign and symbol. Just as the 12th century was not the 1st, now is the 21st century not the 12th. Worship can be contemporary and still meaningful.