More Comments on the 40th anniversary of the Novus Ordo Mass

To continue on the dicussion, we move on further with content.

We posted before on the key changes desired by Sancrosanctum Concilium, namely:

• a wider range of readings
• restoration of prayers of the faithful
• greater importance of the homily
• simplification of the rites
• more opportunities to use the vernacular (but emphasising the importance of Latin)
• Potential for concelebration
• Potential for Communion under both kinds.

All of these aspects have been achieved, although I think that it has failed on the rites being simplified as these have been supplanted by a muktiplicity of prayer options. To go from one Eucharistic Prayer to 12 in my view is a simplification. Possibly the symbolism of concelebration and Communion under both kinds has been overplayed.

Other aspects that are the bane of many commentators such as removal of Communion rails, Communion standing, extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, and female Altar servers simply were not contemplated by the Council fathers and came in much later, and spasmodically.

On reading the General Instruction on the Roman Missal, and comparing it to the Tridentine Missae Rubricae, and the Anglican Book of Commoin Prayer, there is one large difference: the reorientation of the priest from one who leads the church's prayer (as seen in both the documents of the reformers of bother the Protestant and Catholic Reformations) to the idea of the priest "presiding over the community" and acting as some sort of chairman or MC. This is the fundamental flaw in the Novus Ordo Missae. It is from this aspect that we have problems with the liturgy serving the priest's ego, and the discussion on proper or improper orientation of Altars, and other aspects whihc have been liturgical problems over the years.

Where did this come from? The origins come from a "restoration" based upon achaeology in the 1960's whihc has since been debunked (ie. Mass "facing the people"), and an attempt to remove the differences between a Pontifical Solemn Mass from the Throne and other types of Mass. This was done by emphasising the idea that the priest is deputising for the bishop and therefore needs his own "throne".

The best way of course to remove this is to have the priests chair not face the people, and be restored to its more natural place on the Epistle side of the Altar facing North. This is made more effective by having an eastward oriented Altar.

Facing each other in a closed circle to talk to each other is not the essential thing that makes participation by the faithful effective. This simple reorientation is probably more effective than having a crucifix on the Altar or what is beginning to be fashionable in some cirlces of loading the Altar with heaps of candles in the attempt of reorientation.

Reflections on the 40th anniversary of the "Novus Ordo" Mass

On the 40th anniversary of the promulgation of the Novus Ordo Mass there have been a few comments around the blogosphere. fr Z at WDTPRS has done a set of 3 podcasts which are well worth listening to.

Aftyer listening to these podcasts there are a number of things which come up in my mind. The first and which is more stark is that Paul VI did not seem to be confident about the reforms. This comes through in the addresses. It seems that he shares the annoyance and sadness of the changes with his audience, but is willing to accept the sacrifice as this was the will of the church as guided by the Holy Spirit through the Second Vatican Council.

The second aspect is the acceptance that the changes appear to be irreversable. This is an experiment to deepen the spiritual life of the church but there is no going back. There seems to be an acceptance that the older forms of the Roman Rite have gone forever (whihc of course they havent). He knows that he is moving into high risk territory here but is confident that the Holy Spirit will work things out.

Some of the comments are interesting in the light of 40 years. He suggests in his general audience speech that maybe people lost their appreciation of the Mass, and changes would break them out of their lethargy. In hindsight this was true - people got a new appreciation of aspects of the Mass, but also led to aspects which led to some extreme views on both sides of the debate. However, the great gift is that without these changes we would never have had the discussion and research into both forms of the Mass now that the 1962 Missal has been liberated by Benedict XVI.

There has been also discussions on the motivations for Bugnini et al with the changes. From what I read was that there were some positions held in the Consilium which were protestant in origin but that the Pope actaully reined in the Consilium so that the end product was at least catholic, and had moved from its earlier draft (which apparently wanted to remove the Kyrie and Gloria and the Orate fratres). Like everything done by a committee whihc then gets signed off by the CEO, there are a lot of changes along the way. This is something that hard-core traditionalists and conspiracy theorists dont get.

So in the light of the last 40 years truly the spirit moves in mysterious ways. People just want it to move in the way that they want - immediately.

I bet you watch that movie every year...

This year, I'm doing something I've never done before. I'm keeping track of every movie I watch.

I've always saved my ticket stubs when I've gone to the theater, but I've never actually written down every movie I've seen in a year. But at the end of 2008 when everyone was blogging about what movies they had seen over the course of the year, I found myself trying to remember, and guessing, and wondering about my movie log. This year, I'll know for sure.

And as I've been keeping track, I've confirmed what I thought last year anyway: while I like to watch new and new-to-me movies, most of my film time is spent revisiting my favorites. Yep. I'm a Rewatcher.

I've started wondering if others fit this pattern as well. Do you find yourself returning to familiar favorites often? Introducing them to friends, or thinking of some quote and then feeling compelled to watch the whole thing? Does some event or circumstance go along with a certain movie for you?

For me, some favorites that get a lot of play include the movie from which I've taken (and modified) my post title. In You've Got Mail, which I tend to watch when autumn comes around (Don't you love New York in the fall?) or anytime it's replayed on TV, Tom Hanks says "I bet you read that book every year" about Pride and Prejudice. (The BBC film version of which I happen to turn to whenever I am really sick, along with Laura.) I also seem to go on a Civil War kick maybe once a year, which leads to reviewing the whole Ken Burns' documentary, often followed by Gone With the Wind, which occasionally leads to the excellent The Making of a Legend. Add to all that the frequent plays of other favorites. And somehow I'm never bored with them.

I know there must be people out there like me, but I'm sure there are other movie watching types as well. Here's a few profiles I've sketched out:

The Rewatcher:
This type is content to watch the same movies over and over again. If the film was great the first time, why wouldn't it be great to watch again? Perhaps this person is comforted by the familiar, viewing favorite movies as old friends. Maybe he or she is delighted to discover new insights or nuances in the films that got worn out in the VCR. (And yes, this person still has a VCR. And doesn't want to re-buy everything on Blu-ray.) Maybe in an unsure world, the Rewatcher is pleased to know that some things always remain the same. This doesn't mean you will never get a Rewatcher to sit through a previously unseen film, but you'll probably have the most success if the new movie features actors he or she already loves. And if the Rewatcher likes the movie, it will quickly be added to the replay queue.

The Explorer:
Polar opposite of the Rewatcher, this type thrives on always finding something new to watch. They have no trouble at all picking up a random rental, borrowing from friends, or trusting that anything on TCM is worth adding to the DVR. This type is found waiting in line on opening night, wanting to be the first to see and review anything new. While this doesn't mean that the Explorer has no standards, he or she is probably pretty open-minded, finding something to like in almost any film. This type has a never-ending, out of control Netflix queue, and would usually prefer seeing something fresh, or something not watched in a while, instead of viewing the same favorites month after month.

The Picky Viewer:
Here's someone who doesn't mind waiting to see what the consensus is about a film before watching it. This person doesn't want to waste time on junk. He or she may take a chance on the recommendations of friends, if they haven't been burned by being disappointed in their taste before. Perhaps they rely on Netflix Movies You'll <3, or a critic they tend to agree with, or perhaps they only rely on their own judgment, being able to tell from the previews if a movie is worth their time. And if they don't like a movie? Look out. This type is critical. But that just may be the only pleasure the Picky Viewer can derive from watching a sub-standard film.

The Movie Date:
This is the most passive of movie watchers, content to go along with more opinionated friends and family when choosing movies. This doesn't mean that Movie Dates always like everything, or that they don't have their favorites, but in general they are the quiet ones more easily entertained, happy watching whatever as long as everyone else is happy.

What do you think, do you fit into one of these categories? Or are you a hybrid of the above, or perhaps in a category I didn't come up with yet?

Returning to blogging

Sorry for the silence but I have felt unable to blog for some time, due to work and general exhaustion.

I found some interesting comments from the New Liturgical Movement about celebrating using the Missal of Bl John XXIII for the first time.

As a "usus utroque" server I found the following points particularly relevant

....it seems that it is both a reminder and an aid which helps to foster, inculcate or re-emphasize a sense of our Roman liturgical culture -- and that is a thing of broad value.

I asked Fr. Johnson about his own experience of this moment and the training leading up to it; "I believe I'm hooked for life" was his response. Digging a little deeper, he noted the great deal of prayer and preparation which he made for taking this step, burying himself within the liturgical texts and ceremonies. He continued, "what the study of the EF [Extraordinary Form] of the Holy Roman Liturgy accomplished, was to help me develop a deeper understanding of the traditions of the Roman Liturgy, in general, and to understand more clearly where the Ordinary Form received its development."

Happy Anniversary to me!

Today marks the one year anniversary of the start of moviewings. This blog came out of a combination of events: Paul Newman had just died, and I found myself saddened and thinking about what the star and old movies meant to me. A good friend of mine had recently begun blogging, and while I knew I didn't want to create an online diary of my personal life (who'd want to read that, anyway?) I began to think about what I would enjoy writing about. If I wrote about movies, I thought, I would have plenty of things to say. So my first post came out of a desire to express my feelings on Paul Newman's death while opening up a creative outlet for me to talk about my love of movies.

One year and almost 70 posts later, I pause to look back. Finding the LAMB helped me not to feel like I was alone and talking to myself. A major makeover changed the look (but not the spirit) of the blog. In this year, I've learned a lot, like the fact that I'm not the only person who loves classic movies. (It turns out that many people are even more obsessed than I am, although classic film bloggers still seem to be in the minority.) I've had a lot of fun, especially highlighting some of my favorite Overlooked Oldies, doing some silly lists and memes, participating in the Lit Flicks challenge, and declaring January to be a Month O' Musicals. One thing I haven't liked is feeling sometimes that watching movies has become homework instead of entertainment (I don't always want to take notes and think of criticism as I watch a film.) But the blog has also moved me to widen out in the movies I've seen, and I've found some great new-to-me movies that way that I might not have gotten to otherwise.

So where do we go from here? The blog doesn't have an expiration date, but it also is not the only or most important thing in my life. It's very safe to say that I will continue watching films. And whenever I am so inspired to share my thoughts about what I've viewed, especially on the movies that give me wings, this is where I'll do it. Thanks for reading.

The Women -- Movie Chain Review #1

Chain chain chain... chain of reviews...

I've had this idea in my head to start a Chain O' Movie Reviews. What does that mean, you ask? Well. Often for home film festivals I'll create my own movie marathon by chaining together films with a common link. It's kinda like TCM does with a day or month dedicated to one star, but instead of sticking to just one actor I'll chain together film after film with different links in between. Say I start with The Philadelphia Story, then I might move on to Notorious (Cary Grant is the Link) and then I might move on to Casablanca (Ingrid Bergman as the Link). It doesn't just have to be actors as links, either; you can chain directors or even themes back to back (ex: movies with a lot of rain, or perhaps a movie and then the remake). Anyway, I thought it would be fun to carry this habit of linking movies to the blog world. How will it work?

I'll kick things off here with a movie review, the first link in the chain. If you want to join in, after that you'll have to:

1. Call dibs on doing the next review in the comments. First one to speak up gets it, others will have to wait to join up to the next link in the chain! (Chains usually only link one at a time, after all. It's not a movie review tree.)

2. Write your own review of another movie (it should be one not yet used in the chain) and post it on your blog. Make sure the link to the previous review is made clear and that you link back to the original post where the chain began (so we can keep track of how the chain grows). The link can be an actor or actress, director, or something more creative (like a theme).

3. Include the rules of how to continue the chain, and let someone else continue it!

Simple enough, right? Let's get it started!

Movie Chain Review #1: The Women (1939)

Link: First link in the chain, not connected to any reviews (yet).

Review: I found the opening credits of this movie so helpful. As the actresses are introduced, each is paired with an animal that represents her character. So right away you know who's the deer, who's the fox, and who's the old cow. I think more movies should do this.

The word at the beauty parlor, where "Jungle Red" nail polish is all the rage, is that Mary Haines (Norma Shearer) has a husband who's stepping out on her. When Mary's friend (I use the term loosely here) Sylvia (Rosalind Russell) hears about this, she relishes the gossip and eventually sets things up so Mary will hear the rumor.


Mary has been blissfully happy in her marriage to Stephen and as mother to Little Mary (Virginia Weidler). Can she just pretend that nothing is going on and continue her life? Not once she has met the other woman, Crystal Allen (Joan Crawford). The two have a showdown and Mary, choosing pride over love, ends up on a train to Reno. Mary's sweet friend Peggy (Joan Fontaine) is surprisingly also along for the ride, as well as two other women getting divorces: Miriam (Paulette Goddard) and the often-married but still-romantic Countess Flora. The women bide their time at a dude ranch (!) while waiting for their divorces to become final. (Is it wrong to say I was a little happy when Sylvia showed up there as well?) Who will reconcile, who will move on, who will fall in love again? I'll leave the final twists for you to discover.


The joy of the movie for me was not so much in the plot as in the performances. Director George Cukor is completely in his element here with a dialogue-heavy, all female (even the dogs and horses?!?) production. (Interestingly, Cukor was only available for this movie because he was replaced as director of Gone With the Wind. Paulette Goddard too would have only been available here since the one-time frontrunner for the role of Scarlett O'Hara lost out to Vivien Leigh.)

While the actresses are all great in their roles, I was particularly taken with Norma Shearer. How could anyone leave her for Joan Crawford? Impossible.


One thing I didn't really like about the movie was the idea of giving up your pride for love. Maybe occasionally one has to choose, but then, that wouldn't be the case if people just behaved better. Which brings me to what I really didn't like about the movie: the way it portrays female relationships. Maybe it's true that women can be a bit catty, even toward their friends. This movie certainly highlighted that! We've got "friends" gossiping about each other, men-stealing, gold-digging, and dubious advice getting passed along (even from mother to daughter). While all of this does make for an interesting story, I found myself wishing more positive aspects of female friendships could have been included as well. Maybe the estrogen overload just started getting to me after a while. I missed the men.

Final analysis: see it for the great actresses/performances, but don't model your life/love/friendships after it.

Rating: (Although I'm kinda wishing I had made half wing ratings, because this feels more like 3.5 to me.)


Now, what movie will be the next review in the chain? There's plenty of links here to pick from!

Nothing Magnificent about it.

Although I'm a big classic movie fan, I'm not such a purist that I object to any attempt to redo an old film. I try to give remakes a fair shot. Sometimes I'll even find things I like better about the newer version of a movie, perhaps enjoying how things have been updated. But sometimes, as in the case of The Magnificent Ambersons, I just really hate remakes.

Perhaps my love for the 1942 The Magnificent Ambersons predisposed me to being biased against the 2002 made-for-TV movie. But it claimed to be based on the Orson Welles screenplay, and since his film was edited (some say butchered) without him, I hoped at least that the new movie could provide some insight into what got lost. Now, I'm not sure, but I seriously doubt that Orson Welles' grand vision included a weird birth scene filmed from an inside perspective. Nor do I think he intended to show a death scene including some inappropriate tango dancing, or an overly-dramatic car accident scene with a person flying through the air in slow motion.

The scenes in the remake that probably did get cut from the original version include a bit with George as a boy bullying his friends to make him president of their club. There's also more hints about the changing town and the family's changing fortunes, like in a scene where George objects to rental homes being built on the Amberson grounds (when Grandfather's just trying to make some much needed money). There's also some extended information about the trip George makes his mother take, and a scene where George looks through a book of the town's history and can't even find the Amberson name. It's also made clearer in the remake how the Morgans with their new money are becoming the next magnificent family in town.


What's strange is what got cut from the Welles script. For example, there's no beginning narration and setup for the times and family. Instead, the newer movie begins with the ball at the Amberson mansion and later backtracks, using flashbacks to show the history with Eugene and Isabel as well as Georgie as a wild kid. In the original, the town "prophetess" clearly, quickly, and amusingly explains how Isabel ended up with Wilbur instead of Eugene (a man any woman would like a thousand times better) and how this lack of feeling for her husband will lead to Isabel having the most spoiled children. In the remake, it is hinted that the unnaturally close bond with George and his mother comes from him being an only child, but it's not made satisfyingly clear why George is such a terror or why Isabel caves into him. The new version also shows some full mouth kisses between the two, which is just unnecessarily creepy.

Even the things that made it from the original screenplay, like a lot of the dialogue, are mangled in the remake. For example, there's a sweet scene in the original with Eugene getting teased for how things ended with Isabel, and he says there's one thing that makes him forgive how things turned out. At that moment his daughter happens to be walking by, and he says her name. In the remake, while the words remain the same, it's all delivered with everyone sitting around a piano, and everyone oohs and ahhs about how charming this sentiment is. But all the nice subtlety of the original is lost.


As far as the acting in the remake goes, for the most part it is adequate but not extraordinary. James Cromwell does a good job as Major Amberson. But Jonathan Rhys Meyers as George and Jennifer Tilly as Aunt Fanny are both pretty terrible. Yes, George is supposed to be a spoiled brat and not very likable, but Meyers plays him as a tantrum-throwing, foot stomping, growling man-child that it's pretty impossible to care about. (Tim Holt at least had a bit of innocence, humor, and idealism thrown in to temper the obnoxiousness of his character.) Tilly seems to be doing her best impression of Agnes Moorehead, but she lacks the talent to make crying and self-pity sympathetic, and when she's not being shrill and/or weepy she's pretty amazingly dull. The worst is when the two act together; the scenes are painfully long and even ridiculous, like when George is trying to calm his hysterical aunt and ends up crawling full on top of her while someone watches, crying, through the window. (What is up with the incestuous undertones in this movie?)

Also inferior in the newer movie: the music. And instead of the gorgeous deep focus photography? Extreme close-ups, and to-the-camera delivery of the contents of correspondence.


Needless to say, I don't recommend this remake. Unless of course you enjoy something so bad it's laughable at times. Or if you want to commiserate with me on how awful this was. In that case, go ahead and watch it. And hope it doesn't taint your viewing of the much superior original version of The Magnificent Ambersons.

Original: 5/5
5/5 wings
(Even edited, and especially in comparison to the remake, this is a great movie.)

Remake: 1/5
1/5 wings
(Although I seriously considered giving it 0 wings.)

If you want more on the original movie, here's some great links my father passed along to me:

Summary and analysis of The Magnificent Ambersons at filmsite.org
Information at Wellesnet.com, includes writing on the un-making of the movie
A site with lots of images, memorabilia, and information on Ambersons

Top 5 Classic Movies to Sleep to

In my family, it is not unusual to pair a nap with a good movie. Are we such multitaskers that we have to have something going even when we sleep? Are we so lost in the movies that we want to spend every possible moment (waking or sleeping) on good films? Are our favorite movies so familiar and comforting that they make it easy to drift right off to dreamland?

I'm not sure. But I do know that some movies are better to sleep to than others. Musicals and films with lots of explosions are (for obvious reasons) not the best choices. And while there are some good newer movies to put on when you want to sleep, as usual I tend to lean toward older films.

Here's my list of five great classics for sleepy-time:

5. Sabrina (1954) - Like most of the best bedtime stories, it begins "Once upon a time" and has a happily-ever-after ending. The fairy tale story in between features a charming Audrey Hepburn in some fantasy princess-like outfits. As a bonus, if you fall asleep to this one, you just might dream of Billy Wilder's first choice, Cary Grant, playing the Bogart role.


4. The Magnificent Ambersons - Even if you only catch the beginning of this one before nodding off, you'll get an idea for some of the themes. The lovely Orson Wells-narrated opening illustrates the changing times with Joseph Cotten trying on a variety of mens' fashions. You'll soon get introduced to the bratty Georgie and hopefully wake up in time to see his comeuppance at the end.


3. North by Northwest - The exception to the "no explosions" rule, as the loud bits of the movie (usually signaled by the stirring Bernard Herrman music) are thrilling and fun and worth waking up to see. If you have your eyes open before the gunfire in the scene where Eva Marie Saint does some shooting, check out the kid in the back who (eerily) seems to know what's coming.


2. The Third Man - Because zither music is so soothing.




And the number one classic movie to sleep to is....


1. The Big Sleep - It's not just the title that wins this one the top spot. Thanks to all the detectin' being done, there are plenty of quiet follow-the-guy and examine-the-evidence moments that are very conducive to napping. The rainy mood is also great for making those eyelids heavy. And the convoluted plot is not much more understandable even if you stay awake and alert through the whole thing. So just let the banter between Bogie and Bacall lull you right off to sleep.

*Please note, if there's any of these movies you haven't seen yet, I'd recommend staying awake through them at least one time first. Then, the next time you are dealing with insomnia, or when you just need a mid-day snooze, try one of these fabulous sleep-friendly classics.

ACSA Conference 2009

The Australian Catholic Students Association had their annual conference in Brisbane last weekend. Here is a video of their concluding Mass on Sunday held at St Ignatius Church Toowong, which was a Solemn Pontifical Mass in the Ordinary Form. Its good that the reform-of-the-reform Mass is making its appearance in some places in Brisbane.



It was good that the real Altar was used not the communion table used for the ACCC conference. When I asked about the communion table being used at the time I was told that the congregation would get upset if it was removed. Things are changing.

I managed to make it to the Friday night Mass at Duchesne College chapel at University of Queensland which was a Missa cantata in the Extradordinary Form - and what a beautiful Mass it was. The strong participation by the congregation in the chants and responses showed that the myth that there was no participation in the pre-Vatican II Mass exactly that - a myth. In fact I think that I particiapated in the sacred mysteries more fully than in many ordinary form Masses in English.

Guest post on Ginger

If you haven't seen it yet, check out my guest post on Ginger Rogers over at Silents and Talkies. Kate has created a wonderful drawing of Ginger to go with my ramblings. Without wanting to take anything away from the genius of Fred Astaire and the amazing work the pair did together, I wanted to focus on Ginger and all her hard work and talent. Enjoy!

On love in Casablanca

Every time I see Casablanca I enjoy it. It's one of those great classics, rewarding to watch no matter how many times you've seen it before. After you've viewed it once and know the ending, you'd think the love triangle would get less interesting, but I find myself fascinated by it still. Of course I know who Ilsa will end up with. I don't even wish things would go differently -- Victor Laszlo is Ilsa's husband, after all, so it's only right for them to be together. Rick has to make the big sacrifice, being the sentimentalist that he is at heart. Besides, crossing Laszlo in any way would be akin to siding with the Nazis, and our hero can't do that.


So, while I don't question who Ilsa will be with, or even who she should be with, I find it quite interesting thinking about which of the two men she really loves more. On the surface it would seem to be Rick, right? In their scenes together in Paris, she obviously adores him. We never see her kiss Victor in the film, only Rick. And she also only speaks the words "I love you" to Rick. Her main emotion involving Laszlo seems to be fear: she tells him repeatedly to be careful and that she's afraid for him. And, while the guy is certainly admirable, courageous and fearless for his cause, there doesn't seem to be a lot of chemistry there. Ilsa basically admits as much to Rick, telling him the story of herself as a girl meeting this great man, looking up to him, worshiping him, with a feeling she supposed was love. Case closed, she doesn't, couldn't really love him, right? I am not so sure.


Let's look at the way the movie itself defines love. In the scene where the young Bulgarian girl comes to Rick about Captain Renault, to learn if he is a man of his word, she ends up asking him questions about love. "If someone loved you very much" she says, "so that your happiness was the only thing that she wanted in the world, but she did a bad thing to make certain of it, could you forgive her?" Rick's answer? "Nobody ever loved me that much." Really, Rick? Not even Ilsa in Paris?

I think he's right. Ilsa certainly loved him, but not that much, as Rick says. Otherwise she would have done the bad thing -- staying with him and forsaking Laszlo. Does she leave out of her love for Laszlo, or does she make the sacrifice for love of the cause, doing her duty? Either way, Rick loses out. She loves him enough to lie to him, making sure he will leave Paris safely, but not enough so that his happiness is all that matters.

Let's apply this same idea of love moving someone to do a bad thing to the relationship with Ilsa and Laszlo. When Ilsa comes to Rick for the letters of transit, she certainly seems ready to do a bad thing, pulling out a gun and threatening to shoot Rick. He makes it very clear what is at stake, telling her that if Laszlo and the cause mean so much to her, she won't stop at anything, taunting her to go ahead and shoot. He's really testing her love for Laszlo here: does she love him enough to do this bad thing? Apparently not, because she lowers the gun. Her love for Rick seems to have won out, as she tells him she couldn't stay away and can never leave him again. Should he believe her? Should we?

It is possible to interpret it that Ilsa really has given in to her love for Rick. But I think it is really a sign of her love for Laszlo. She is willing to do the bad thing, leaving him, being with Rick, so that she can make sure of Victor's safety and happiness. Also, when she left Victor earlier that night, he says he loves her, and while she doesn't say it back, she does begin to ask him "whatever I do will you believe that I..." he tells her she doesn't even have to say it. The implication is clear. She is off to do a bad thing, but she wants him to know she loves him.

Besides, at this point in the movie, I don't see how Ilsa can possibly still love Rick. There may have been some lingering feeling there when she first saw him again. But after she came to explain things to him and found him drunk, she has lost her respect for him. And respect and love go hand in hand for Ilsa, as she explains in her story about her first feelings for Laszlo, as we see when she looks at him admiringly as he stirs up the crowd in the cafe. In contrast, she looks at Rick with contempt and disgust at what he's become. And surely part of what she loved about him in Paris was the record hinted at throughout the film, the deeds which make him wanted by the Nazis, too. She's a sucker for an idealist.

Even after saying she can't leave Rick again, her concern for Laszlo is foremost. "You'll help him now, won't you?" she begs Rick. When they meet the next day, she remains agitated about Victor. The show of surrender to Rick has been just that, a show. So the story Rick spins at the end for Laszlo about Ilsa only pretending to still love him, that all that was over long ago (which Renault says is a lie, and which may have been a lie for Rick) really seems to be the truth about Ilsa. But what Rick says about Paris is also true, that they had lost it and had gotten it back, although I don't think it's exactly how he says it is. Maybe he got it back that night Ilsa came over, but she gets Paris back when Rick sends her off with Laszlo. Because now she has her respect back for Rick, she can look at him admiringly again and remember those days in Paris fondly. She leaves him with the same words she left him with in Paris: "God bless you."


You can also flip this idea of love in Casablanca to test the men's love for Ilsa. Rick is willing to do a bad thing for her, more than one actually. He ends up killing a man to make sure Ilsa gets away safely with Laszlo, making her happy at his own expense. Laszlo also is ready to do a bad thing, at least as bad as he gets, telling Rick to use the letters of transit to take his wife away. "Yes, I love her that much." he says.

Not to be overlooked is the love all three have for the cause. All have done bad/illegal things and/or made sacrifices for the cause. But I don't think the characters are motivated solely by their love for right. While the problems of three people may not amount to a hill of beans in a crazy world, they still amount to something, and of course impact the way each character acts. Rick loves Ilsa. Victor loves Ilsa. Ilsa loves them both, but in the end, she seems to love Victor more.

The balance of love and sacrifice, ideas of honor and duty verses selfishness, all these themes make Casablanca endlessly interesting, its finale wonderfully satisfying. These are just some of many things that make this movie great and keep me coming back for more.

St Josemaria

Today is the feast day of St Josemaria. We had a great solemn Mass in Brisbane for his feastday last night.

A recommendation to those of you who have long working hours like myself, should remember that "this is your sanctification". Im sure that that this is something that St Josemaria would have said in reply to a disciple saying "my boss is so demanding and I need to put in absurd hours".

Corpus Christi - from Toledo, Spain

When I was in Toledo, the primatial see within Spain, a couple of years ago I visited the Cathedral, which is one of the larger in Europe. Here is the sanctuary, with its large rood screen. Note also the two pulpits, characteristic of Spanish churches: one for the Epistle and one of the Gospel. I assume that the Epistle and Gospel were read facing outwards. I would not say towards the congregation because where the congregation would have stood and knelt would have been outside the choir. The rest of the choir is actually behind those people you see sitting in the foreground. It is a closed off area protected by a similar iron screen. This is where the archbishops throne and the stalls for the Cathedral canons are located. The Archbishops throne directly faces the Sanctuary in line with the High Altar.

Here is the High Altar with its reredos, over 10 metres high. Similar to other Cathedrals in Spain, the Altar has been moved away from the reredos, and an archbishops throne placed in the middle facing where someone thought that the people should be. This results in the ridiculous situation where there are two thrones in the Choir facing each other. Hopefully this can be corrected someday.

The Monstrance that we saw in the Cathedral Sacristry, was over 3 metres high and is either lifted by a team of 8 to 10 men or wheeled around on a trolley.

Anyway I was please to discover a couple of You-tubes of last week's procession, which brings the feel of the bulilding all to life. With the applause (which has a different meaning to the English speaking world), the rose petals from the roof, the bells, and the general exuburance - how different to our boring minimalist approach in Australia where Corpus Christi is basically ignored, at least in my part of the country.

VIVA EL CHRISTO REY!!!!

Here the monstrance is borne into the Cathedral. It looks as if they came through the South transept door, whihc is actually the main entrance off the street.

And the monstrance being carried into the sanctuary.

The Ordines Romani

Often we hear arguments about what was the authentic form of the Mass taken from hsistory and tradition. Is it the Extraordinary Form (the Roman Rite according to the books used at the Second Vatican Council) as celebrated in some areas, or the Ordinary Form developed following the Council (sometimes called the Novus Ordo?).

Like everything its about going back to the sources. Most "liturgists" hang onto St Justin Martyr's account of Mass being celebrated in the second century AD. However, we know that the Mass in both the Eastern and Western parts of the Roman Empire went through a considerable state of flux subsequent to this. Justins account is very brief so it does not give very much of a flavour of what went on.

This is why a series of documents called the Ordines Romani become important because they not only outline what was said in liturgies but also what people did in the liturgy. The Ordines Romani were a series of documents with the first ordo (Ordo I) believed to have been written before the end of the seventh century AD, and final set written by the 15th century. We will focus on Ordo I with some reference to a 9th century AD ordo - Ordo III. The purpose of these ordo's seem to be as a guide to what was done in at a Solemn Pontifical Mass in Rome for people who wanted to learn liturgy but could not travel there.

What I intend to do in the next few weeks (God willing) is briefly go through the various elements of the Ordo Romanus, because I do not think that a comparison with both of the modern forms (1962 and 1970 missals) have been done. What it shows clearly, is that the Ordo of the original Roman Rite contains elements of both and truly is the father of both. Conversely neither can lay claim to be doing "what the early Christians did", which often is an obsession of liturgists these days.

The other thing with the Ordo is that it shows up the reason for some obscure practices in our modern liturgies, so this little study should inform the tradition. Some pics from visits of actual churches and basilicas where these ceremonies were enacted give a bit of the flavour.

Who were the Deaconesses?

With the discussion last week as to deaconesses and the question of legitimacy, I though that I would take the opportunity to explore deaconesses in the early church.

My source is the Catholic Encyclopedia, although I have taken out some of the bias that the 1907 writers put into the discussion.

It was an ordained ministry.

From the 4th century Apostolic Constitutions (a document whihc is Roman but seeme to have some eastern elements in it:


Concerning a deaconess, I, Bartholomew enjoin O Bishop, thou shalt lay thy hands upon her with all the Presbytery and the Deacons and the Deaconesses and thou shalt say: Eternal God, the Father of Our Lord Jesus Christ, the creator of man and woman, that didst fill with the Spirit Mary and Deborah, and Anna and Huldah, that didst not disdain that thine only begotten Son should be born of a woman; Thou that in the tabernacle of witness and in the temple didst appoint women guardians of thy holy gates: Do thou now look on this thy handmaid, who is appointed unto the office of a Deaconess and grant unto her the Holy Spirit, and cleanse her from all pollution of the flesh and of the spirit, that she may worthily accomplish the work committed unto her, to thy glory and the praise of thy Christ.

The Catholic Encyclopedia discusses the fact that bishops in the early church did argue themselves as to whether this was an ordained ministry or not, and refers to some obscure councils the opinion that it was not an ordained ministry. The EC's arguments are not all that strong.

What did they do?

The primary purpose of the Deaconesses was in the era of segregation of worship, with a separate mens and womens section in the church. Therefore their roles were:

• the instruction and baptism of catechumens
• guarding the doors and maintaining order amongst those of their own sex in the church,
• acting as intermediaries between the clergy and the women of the congregation.

They may have also functioned as Ministers of Holy Communion to the womens section of the church but I have not found any evidence for this.

However, the Apostolic Constitutions make it clear that "the deaconess gives no blessing, she fulfills no function of priest or deacon", So in Rome at least, their role was very different from the Deacon. For instance they did not minister at the Altar assisting the priest like a Deacon nor did they read the Gospel, sing the Ite Missa Est, or preach a homily.

However, we do hear that in the churches of Syria and Asia, of them presiding over assemblies of women, reading the Epistle and Gospel, distributing the Blessed Eucharist to nuns, lighting the candles, burning incense in the thuribles, adorning the sanctuary, and anointing the sick. This seemed to be regarded as an abuse which ecclesiastical legislation soon repressed.

If they did not function as a deacon did they have any role in the Liturgy?

Its difficult to determine where they had a place in the liturgy. A document called "Testament of Our Lord" (c. 400), widows had a place in the sanctuary during the celebration of the liturgy, they stood at the anaphora behind the presbyters, they communicated after the deacons, and before the readers and subdeacons, and they had a charge of, or superintendence over the deaconesses.

It is recorded that in the time of Justinian (d. 565) at the Basilica of St. Sophia in Constantinople the staff consisted of sixty priests, one hundred deacons, forty deaconesses, and ninety subdeacons. However, I cannot see any reference to them in any of the Roman legislation from the same period. One exception is the the ninth Ordo Romanus mentions, feminae diaconissae et presbyterissae quae eodem die benedicantur. Diaconissae are also mentioned in the procession of Leo III in the ninth century

When did they die out?

The ministry seemed to have died out when just about everyone was Christian and adult baptism had practically died out. Balsamon, Patriarch of Antioch about A.D. 1070 states that deaconesses in any proper sense had ceased to exist in the Church though the title was borne by certain nuns while Matthew Blastares (c 14th cent) said that by the the tenth century that the civil legislation (presumably that of the eastern Roman Empire) concerning deaconesses, which ranked them rather among the clergy than the laity had then been abandoned or forgotten.

The only surviving relic of the ordination of deaconesses in the West (and this may have disappeared after Vatican II) was the conferring of a stole and maniple to Carthusian nuns in the ceremony of their profession.

Could they be revived?

The short answer is probably not as the need for the role has disappeared (men and women worship together and there is no modesty issues around baptism) and laity (whether men or women) can provide leadership in these areas. It needs to be kept in mind that the role was never an Altar ministry.

All this been said, it gives an interesting overview to the fact that the Church saw it as an ordained ministry, and that ordination to specific non priestly roles could be opened to everyone.

What the well-dressed (classic) movie lover is wearing

Have you seen the 15th Anniversary TCM shirts ? The stuff that dreams are made of, for sure.

But I think I may be even more taken with this new Threadless release, "That Old Movie Magic". The film projector is pretty fabulous all on its own, but wait, there's more, in glow-in-the-dark ink! Makes perfect sense... the lights dim, the film rolls, and magical things happen.


Check out that Casablanca nod. Sweet!

If you're so inspired, you might want to pick up a t-shirt or two. Or three or four, and send the extras my way. :-)

St Marys abuses spreading?

Australia's capital cities have been celebrating joint Anglican and Roman Catholic initiatives at different times and in the main this is good to see. Different Anglican and Catholic churches have hosted clergy from the other church and the practice (as was done most recently at the installation of Archbishop Nichols at Westminster), is to have the clergy of the guest church in choir and having all the rights of clergy in choir (including being incensed separately to the celebrant(s).

However, today, in a Catholic Cathedral a Mass was celebrated in which an Anglican Deaconess processed with the Gospel book and proclaimed the Gospel.

In the Mass the Gospel is always proclaimed by an ordained Minister and the role of this is the Deacon and if a deacon is not available, the Celebrant (GIRM (Australian version) n59)

Whoever authorised this obviously does not understand that the Bull Apostolicae Curae promulgated by Pope Leo XIII on 15 September 1896 still applies, and that declares:

We pronounce and declare that ordinations carried out according to the Anglican rite have been, and are, absolutely null and utterly void.

In addition, these women are not even recognised universally in their own church (eg Anglican Archdiocese of Sydney).

The Respondum in relation to the declaration Dominus Jesus of the Solemnity of Sts Peter and Paul 2007 states:

Why do the texts of the Council and those of the Magisterium since the Council not use the title of “Church” with regard to those Christian Communities born out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century?

According to Catholic doctrine, these Communities do not enjoy apostolic succession in the sacrament of Orders, and are, therefore, deprived of a constitutive element of the Church. These ecclesial Communities which, specifically because of the absence of the sacramental priesthood, have not preserved the genuine and integral substance of the Eucharistic Mystery cannot, according to Catholic doctrine, be called “Churches” in the proper sense.

What we had here is an abuse of the St Marys South Brisbane kind in which what is essentially a layperson proclaiming the gospel, and this done within a major city Cathedral in which people in charge are supposed to know better. It gives people the impression that we are in communion when we are not. I am sure that some members of the congregation were scandalised by it.

This was foisted upon the congregation without any warning, probably because of other attempts at misguided ecumenism, which were stopped before they occurred.

This could have been so easily avoided by having the Anglican ministers proclaim the other readings, or leading prayers of the faithful. This was crossing the line into doctrinal error.

But on a lighter note, before the Cooees boys steal my thunder, this video emphasises my sentiments:

That's "Mrs. William Holden" to you

This silliness began over at Asleep in New York with Mrs. Richard Conte, and pretty soon everyone was playing along. (Well, the girls anyway. Guess you guys didn't play this game growing up or something.) Anyway, here's my results:

(Don't know why there's all this space here. Must be spoiler space, since it is a glimpse into the future.)

		I will marry William Holden.
		After a wild honeymoon, We will settle down in New York in our fabulous House.
		We will have 12 kid(s) together.
		Our family will zoom around in a puce Studebaker.
		I will spend my days as a detective, and live happily ever after.

I was a bit relieved to have dodged Joel McCrea (wouldn't want my 12 kids having his nose) but I was rather sad not to have ended up in Casablanca.

Who else has a fun movie fantasy future? Mrs. Dana Andrews (yes, we're all jealous), Mrs. Tyrone Power , Mrs. Rudolph Valentino, Mrs. Robert Taylor, and Mrs. Gower Champion.

I'd like to see some of you men try it... doesn't someone out there want to be Mr. Marilyn Monroe?

For all the Latinists out there....

.....and I'm sure that there are quite a few of you who read this blog, Sydney's Campion College is conducting a week-long intensive course on Ecclesiastical/Medieval Latin. It is not targeted to a specific learning group; you can be a novice or expert in lingua Latina and attend. Texts for translation over the five days will include passages from scripture, the Church Fathers Ante-Nicene and Post-Nicene (including my old friends Minucius Felix and Augustine), hymns and medieval texts such as the Legenda Aurea.

The course runs between 13th-17th of July. Though I will probably not be able to attend myself (very disappointing), I would highly recommend that if you are able, you should! You can find out more information and an application form at Campion College's website.

Movie reviews in brief

Although I haven't been posting much lately, I have still (of course) been watching movies! Instead of doing individual posts for every movie I've seen recently, I thought it might be fun to share some brief thoughts on the films I've been watching.

Two classics are first:

Modern Times

Another one from my mostly seen movies list. Some familiar gags (Charlie getting fed by one machine and caught in the cogs of another) were still quite amusing on re-watching. But my favorite part was a bit I had never seen before, with Charlie as a dancing and singing waiter. Watching as he pulled himself around by the seat of his pants had me laughing so hard I was crying. Chaplin is great. And Paulette Goddard is just so cute!

5/5 wings



As a side point, watching this movie made me realize why it's so hard for me to get into silent movies. Since I love to multi-task, I often put a movie on in the background while I'm doing other things. This works great for revisiting favorite classics where I know what's going on, but silent movies demand more of my attention, so I watch them less frequently. Modern Times reminded me why I should spend more time on movies without dialogue.


Kitty Foyle

The film (particularly the dialogue) does feel a bit dated, but it's worth watching if only to see Ginger Rogers in her strong, Oscar-winning performance. Kitty Foyle is a white-collar girl (the costumes reflect a very literal interpretation of this) facing an important decision: to marry one man or run away with an old flame.

The conclusion to the central dilemma of the story, which man Kitty will end up with, is not really a shocker, but it's an emotional journey nonetheless. I only wish there were more options out there for the heroine. Wyn is fun, rich, romantic, and a coward. Mark is steady, stable, thrifty, and (let's be honest here) rather dull. Are there really no other men in Kitty's acquaintance? In the movies, there is no middle-ground. The choices are love, passion & heartbreak vs. friendship, stability, & boredom. I think Kitty should have held out for door three.

(I'm tempted to give it 3 wings, but I'm weighting it higher as a classic and for Ginger.)

4/5 wings



Now for two new-ish movies:

Chicken Little

Fun family movie that drags a bit toward the end. The very cute Chicken Little really needed a cuter voice. But the vocal stylings of Joan Cusack and Steve Zahn were quite delightful. And Fish Out of Water was just too cool.

3/5 wings



The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

What I liked: The aging effects, the man with the backwards clock, the guy who got struck by lightning, and very little else.

The comparisons to Forrest Gump are justified. And while I'm no big fan of that movie, I think I did like it a bit better than Benjamin Button.

If you take away the gimmick of a man aging backwards and the few interesting things that arise from this, you are left with a very mundane tale. Whether you like it or not then may depend on the strength of the love story between Benjamin and Daisy. While I did sympathize with Benjamin, particularly at the beginning of the movie with his earnest innocence shining through the body of an old man, I personally did not care for Daisy at all (and didn't get why Benjamin did).

What is the message of this meandering movie? That even if your life seems disjointed, it's OK. Maybe you were just born to live a disjointed life. The idea that life is only about what is thrown at you and not what you make of it is not a theory I subscribe to, sorry.

(Would be 1 wing for story alone, but for Pitt's performance and for the effects I'll add on one more wing.)

2/5 wings



Now, a movie I actually saw in the theater! (It's been a while.)

Star Trek

Well, there's definitely things to nit-pick if you want to. Stuff I didn't like: the uninteresting bad dude, what they did to the Romulans (tattooed heads, now?) and a plot that was a bit weak if you thought about it too much (though all time-travel stories seem to unravel if you think hard about them).

But the movie was more about reintroducing the characters and giving their stories a spin, and I thought that was done well. (Although I've never been a huge fan of the original Star Trek, I prefer TNG & DS9, so they could have changed things really dramatically and I wouldn't have minded or maybe even noticed.) It was visually cool and super entertaining. And I think it found a good balance between pleasing Trekkies and finding a new audience (and setting up for some sequels).

A couple leaving the theater just ahead of my group did not agree. Old enough to have been fans of the show when it was first on TV, they did not seem to appreciate the changes at all. The wife was particularly distressed about what had been done to Spock's mother. The husband's complaints were more about movies in general, how the world is so bad that people just want flashier entertainment to distract them. You know, he's got a point there.

(The movie's not perfect, but for sheer entertainment value it gets 4 wings from me.)

4/5 wings



By the way, if you are wondering what happened to the Vulcan James Dean, I retired him so he wouldn't be in your face every time you loaded the page here. But if you want, you can Trek Yourself. It's fun to do with actors and famous movie lines!

The Pantheon

One of the greatest buildings in the world that I have visited is the Pantheon in Rome. Today it is its 1400th birthday as a Christian church although it dates from the 2nd century AD and parts of the building to the reign of the Emperor Augustus. Im not sure how many times a week they celebrate Mass there but it seems to be on a regular basis.

The great thing about this video is that you get to see parts of the building that you dont get to see as a tourist. Notice all the original Roman brickwork.

Calling all classic movie bloggers... join the flock of LAMBs!

So, I was finally getting around to making my nominations for the 2009 LAMMY Awards when I discovered a somewhat disappointing thing: several of the blogs I was wanting to nominate are not LAMBs and are therefore ineligible!

You may be asking, what is this LAMB stuff all about, anyway? Well, the acronym stands for the Large Association of Movie Blogs. The LAMB is a place for film bloggers of all sorts to connect. Different blogs are spotlighted, there are a variety of events to participate in, and readers searching for movie blogs can make some great blog discoveries.

The purpose of my post is twofold. First, I want to highlight some movie blogs that I don't see on the LAMB list, but that I really enjoy reading. (Since I couldn't give them LAMMY nomination love I figure I can at least give them linky love.) Here some great blogs to check out:

Another Old Movie Blog -- Excellent, insightful writing.
Asleep in New York -- Not just for Dana Andrews lovers.
Cinema Coquette -- Emphasizing the chic in chick flicks!
Cinema Splendor -- Natalie Wood fan with a perky perspective.
Classic Film Oasis -- Has me ready to petition for great films to be released on DVD.
Classic Forever -- Classic movie photos delivered daily.
Classic Hollywood Nerd -- Currently going on about favorite movie dancers.
Fire and Music -- Wonderfully written reviews that start with a quote and end with illumination.
Hollywood Dreamland -- We often seem to be on the same movie page.
Self-Styled Siren -- The siren is good enough to get away with writing about herself in the third person.
Silents and Talkies -- For the very cute classic movie-inspired art.
The Film Doctor -- Smart, savvy reviews and sensational links.
Wonders in the Dark -- Counting down movies decade by decade.

Second, I want to encourage more movie bloggers to join the LAMB. Especially you classic movie blogs -- the LAMB needs a better balance of classic film lovers on board. Come on, it's free. Think about it!

Catholicism in the Land of the Rising Sun

Apologies for no posts....I mentioned the loss of my internet, and had only had it back for about a day before I was scheduled to leave on an overseas trip. My trip was to Japan, and I'm going to post a little about it here.

Christianity is a minority faith in Japan- Roman Catholicism in particular only makes up 0.5% of the population, according to statistics from Catholic-Hierarchy.org (among this small minority is Japan's current PM, Taro Aso). The majority of Japanese practice Buddhism (specifically Mahayana or 'Greater Vehicle' Buddhism) and the animist Shinto faith. If you stay in a Japanese hotel, not only will you find a copy of the Gideons New Testament (with side-by-side Japanese and English translation) in your bedside table drawer, but also a copy of the Teachings of Buddha next to it. The Buddha of Compassion (Kanzeon in Japanese) is often closely identified with Mary. Though I did see traditional statuary of Mary (St. Mary's Cathedral in Tokyo has a copy of Michaelangelo's Pieta), she is also depicted as a Japanese woman with long flowing hair and wearing traditional kimono.

It was Francis Xavier who brought the Gospel to the Japanese in the late 16th century, and the churches I visited all featured some statue or image in his likeness. The bust in the photo below is displayed in St. Mary's Cathedral- it once belonged to the Medici family and was donated to St. Mary's by Cardinal Josef Frings, the former Archbishop of Cologne. Catholic Christians in Japan have encountered some hostility; the story of the twenty-six missionaries and converts being crucified during the Edo period is well-documented, and Christianity was banned until the 19th century Meiji Restoration, which allowed for freedom of religion.

The church here is a parish in Ashiya, a suburb outside of Osaka and was built in the 1930s. It is looked after at present by three priests- two Japanese and a Frenchman (there was an Italian there during my stay, but he was due to leave for another parish within a few weeks). My friend and her mother, who I attended mass with there, related that Japan also suffers from a shortage of clergy, which may explain the presence of the expat priests. A few parishes in Tokyo offer masses in English, but most services will be in Japanese and in some cases Tagalog and Spanish.

During World War II, some churches were destroyed when the Americans bombed the country; the most notable example being Nagasaki's Urakami Cathedral, which was destroyed when the second atomic bomb hit a short distance from the building. As a consequence, some churches rebuilt after the war were constructed with a modern appearance. The pictures below are of St. Mary's Cathedral, which was one such parish that was bombed during the war. I attended Palm Sunday mass there, and while I felt initially staggered by the size of the place, I found the interior to my liking. It appears quite cave-like in the photos below, but the simplicity of it is quite pleasing to the eye in person.

Kawaramachi Church is the seat of the Bishop of Kyoto. I was surprised to find it a short distance away from my hotel. The layout of the church bears some similarity to that of the Stuartholme School chapel in Brisbane with its large triangular stained glass window behind the altar. This church too was fairly simple in layout, with only the right wall decorated with stained glass windows. The third photos shows a section of this wall depicting the Stations of the Cross.

I have taken no photos of the services I went to (something I wouldn't feel comfortable doing, since they're not my parishes and I don't know the parishioners), but will comment on what might be considered a particular quirk to Japanese worship. Standing during the entire Liturgy of the Eucharist is practiced by most, with kneeling for prayer after communion. The parish in Ashiya also employs a system where a plateful of unconsecrated hosts is placed at the church entrance alongside the ciborium, and before you take your seat you take a host from the plate and place it in the ciborium with tongs. This is done to ensure exact numbers for communion. Altar serving practices are not too different from ours here; most of the servers I saw were young children around the ages of 8-10 (with an adult supervisor), and were very disciplined and committed.

If readers would still like to learn more about the Japanese Catholic experience, I can highly recommend the works of the author Endo Shusoku, in particular 'Silence' and 'Scandal'.