More New Translation

          

Can you read that? Me neither..."rational"..."tunic"..."holocausts"?...willya just speak English?

 In 6th grade Wednesday Sunday School™ we spend 3 classes on the Mass, taught from the Missalette. The Mass quotes from the Bible extensively, and I expect the kids to recognize some of those instances, and figure out why they matter. Unfortunately, the current English translation of the Latin text isn't reliably close to the 'original' 1970 Latin Mass, nor to the English of the New American Bible, which can make the Scriptural sources hard to figure out. For example, the children are taught the story of the Centurion. In the NAB, he says:  "Lord, I am not worthy to have you enter under my roof; only say the word and my servant will be healed." But as we approach Communion in the Mass, we say: "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed," which is so paraphrased I have to coach the kids into seeing the connection. And I wonder: what's the point of quoting Scripture if the quote can't be recognized by the typical layperson at Mass? I assume the prior translators wanted a more accessible text for the peeps in the pews, even if there was a corresponding loss of meaning and Biblical context. But if 11-year-olds can and do rise to the occasion, then their elders should be able to manage as well...which reminds me of the KJV/ Douai Rheims translation brouhaha in the early 17th century. 

Digressing already I see.

Anyway, I've been periodically keeping up with news about the final text of the Roman Missal, Third Edition; what I'd call the New & Improved English Mass. I've hoped for a text which is closer to the Latin Mass and closer to Scripture, which makes the catechist's job easier. For those who must know every detail, here's the link to the approved revised text:

http://usccb.org/romanmissal/girm-texts.shtml

The USCCB subtitles its Third Edition webpage "New Words: A Deeper Meaning, but the Same Mass," and they are absolutely right. I might've said "Back to the Old Words: A Deeper Meaning, but the Same Mass," but I wasn't on the committee.

And for those who simply must access the 1970 Latin text (you know who you are) here it is:

http://www.catholicliturgy.com/index.cfm/FuseAction/TextContents/Index/4/SubIndex/67/TextIndex/9

Out of the blue on Saturday (8/21), I learned from the pulpit that our parish would be hosting a lecture on Sunday by Msgr. Bruce Harbert on the New Translation of the Roman Canon; he's the executive director of ICEL (International Committee on English in the Liturgy), and superintended the translation. On Sunday his lecture covered the new translation in general, and specifically the first few lines of the Mass as examples. I was already familiar with the newly-revised Centurion's quote and preferred it to what we have now, and during the Q&A I asked him to comment on that particular bit of revision.

First, he said that to comment on the Centurion's line, he should back up and cover that whole part of the Mass. He started here: "This is the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world," which is replaced by "Behold the Lamb of God, behold him who takes away the sins of the world." Catechetically the new version is much better, since it more closely aligns with John 1: 29 & 36.

The second line we have now is "Happy are those who are called to his supper." The new Third Edition says "Blessed are those called to the supper of the Lamb," which is closer to its source, Revelations 19:9. I would truly prefer "Blessed are those called to the wedding feast of the Lamb," per the Bible verse, but the 1970 Latin text says 'supper' not 'wedding feast'. So I'll still have to do some explaining as we go from the Missalette to the Bible. I do wonder why the writers of the Latin text didn't say 'wedding feast,' which is so much richer a concept than 'supper,' (Jesus marrying His Bride, the Church) but I wasn't on the committee. Think supper; now think wedding feast. Which one seems Heavenly to you? Uh-huh.

Last comes the Centurion, who now says, "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed," and will soon say, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my soul shall be healed." (Mt 8:8, Lk 7:6)  Again, I'd prefer the verse, "Lord, I am not worthy that you should enter under my roof, but only say the word and my servant shall be healed," which is what he like, said to Jesus, y'know? But I wasn't on the committee.

[Here are three texts in Latin: Ecce Agnus Dei, ecce qui tollit peccata mundi/ Beati qui ad cenam Agni vocati sunt/ Domine, non sum dignus ut intres sub tectum meum: sed tantum dic verbo, et sanabitur anima mea.]

Msgr. elaborated a bit on each, and why the new translation was better. Then he paused...and said, "Does this answer your question?" I responded that it was a bugaboo every year in Catechism class to teach that chunks of the Mass are taken from Scripture, but the quotes in Mass are so altered that it's hard for the kids to make the connections without lots of explaining. The new translation will make my job easier. He then said that was really the point of the whole lecture: that the Third Edition will make the connection between the Mass and the Bible more explicit. As the meeting broke up, someone came over and said he had never realized that "Lord, I am not worthy to receive you, but only say the word and I shall be healed" was intended to recall the Centurion. Imagine that.

(As it turns out, these three lines that he discussed are the same three that get most of the attention in my Mass classes, per this link: MassDensity.)

There's one other revision I'm aware of that will also make for better catechesis, which occurs in the Eucharistic prayer:

Currently: "Almighty God, we pray that your angel may take this sacrifice to your altar in heaven. Then, as we receive from this altar the sacred body and blood of your Son, let us be filled with every grace and blessing."

New: "In humble prayer we ask you, almighty God: command that these gifts be borne by the hands of your holy Angel to your altar on high in the sight of your divine majesty, so that all of us who through this participation at the altar receive the most holy Body and Blood of your Son may be filled with every grace and heavenly blessing." In this case I'll be able to emphasize "participation." And the new text is much more vivid, which helps 6th-graders if not jaded adults.

(More on this part of the Mass here: Samson&EucharisticPrayer#1)

So I'm happy with the Third Edition Mass, and will be using it this year in Wednesday Sunday School™. By the time it debuts in November 2011, the kids'll be prepared, and may even explain some of it to their parents.

Translation Intermission

Between the last post and the next one, I'm adding this useful observation by friend, fellow blogger, and Latin translator extraordinaire, Magister Christianus, co-author of the book shown above. Magister writes in response to the issues involved in the latest English translation of the 1970 Latin Mass:

"If the English were not over their heads, I would share this with my students to help them see the importance of precision in language and all that goes into issues of translation. At some point I usually tell them that I do not know how to translate Latin myself. They are shocked, and then I explain with a simple sentence like:

Puella aquam portat.

My first year Latin students, who are just two weeks into the year, could translate this as "The girl carries water," but I point out some variations. Which of these is the best translation:

The girl carries the water.

The girl carries water.

A girl carries the water.

A girl carries water.

"This can go on and on until you have produced 27 distinct translations, several of which are not Standard English, but all of which incorporate some, though undoubtedly not all of what is going on in the Latin. The closest thing to a full translation is something like the following monstrosity:"

"A girl, perhaps one in particular or one in general or even the concept of girl, but no matter what understood as a smaller or lesser boy and thus significant for her attention-getting placement in the sentence, though the attention may simply be to connect the lesser boy with the servile content of the sentence, is now in the process of carrying or in general transports, but at this moment or in general does nothing else with, water, whether that be aquatic fluid in general, a particular yet unidentified container of water, or the specific container of water that had taken the speaker’s attention."

Magister blogs in English at Bedlam or Parnassus, and in Latin at Ecclesia Latina.

New Translation

Yes, yes, it's completely exciting that we're getting a New (and unlike New Coke, improved) Mass in English, which will make catechizing the little pagans much easier, and which I'll post about in more detail later. In the meantime, get ready for whining from the pews and desks about having to, like, learn new stuff, y'know?

Just to show ya how old this Anglophone complaint is, let's look at the Preface to the 1611 King James Bible, which followed hot on the heels of the Douai-Rheims Bible, which was the English translation done under the auspices of the Catholic Church. In trying to stay faithful to the source text (St. Jerome's Latin Vulgate), the D-R translators borrowed some Latin words (some of which had first been borrowed from Greek) into their English Bible. The KJV translators, however, objected to putting such scholarly, unfamiliar words into a book which the common man should be able to understand, and said as much.

First, unlike the Puritans, they aren't gonna fiddle with what already works:

"Lastly, we have on the one side avoided the scrupulosity of the Puritans, who leave the old Ecclesiastical words, and betake them to other, as when they put WASHING for BAPTISM, and CONGREGATION instead of CHURCH..."

That is, Greek words such as 'Baptism' βαπτίζω are ok when everybody already knows them, and there's no point in replacing them with plain Anglo-Saxon stock such as 'Washing.' Which makes me wonder about those Puritans: 'washing' wouldn't translate 'baptize' all that well for the full-immersion-no-sprinkling crowd. And sturdy Anglo-Saxon 'Church' beats the Latin-sourced 'Congregation' any day. English people are familiar with Baptism and Church...leave well enough alone. (I wonder why they didn't try to translate Shakespeare into English? That's a little joke.)

Nor will they get hoity-toity like the Catholics across the Channel:

"....as also on the other side we have shunned the obscurity of the Papists, in their AZIMES, TUNIKE, RATIONAL, HOLOCAUSTS, PRAEPUCE, PASCHE, and a number of such like, whereof their late Translation is full, and that of purpose to darken the sense, that since they must needs translate the Bible, yet by the language thereof, it may be kept from being understood. But we desire that the Scripture may speak like itself, as in the language of Canaan, that it may be understood even of the very vulgar."

And to some extent they are right: who knows what azimes are? But then again, tunic, rational, and holocausts have been regular English words for a long time now, and thank ya Douai-Rheims for them; I suppose the KJV translators roll over in their graves every time an Englishman says "rational." Even Paschal is standard Church vocabulary on both sides of the Atlantic. Regarding praepuce...well, this isn't a blog about plumbing, and even to mention it is to say too much.

So the little effort it'll take to get acquainted with the new Mass in English should be worth it, and I can already assure you, neither azimes nor praepuce makes an appearance, thank goodness. We sure don't need no stinkin' azimes: if English was good enough for Jesus it's good enough for me.

This article has also been posted at Amazing Catechists.

2,000 Words

This article has also been posted at Sunday Snippets http://rannthisthat.blogspot.com/

I have pictures of my kids all over my office, from newborn to college to children of their own. I also have pictures my children drew all over my office, which prompt some thinking about catechism.

This one's typical:

This was drawn by two of my kids, Michael and Francesca. I think they were about 12 and 9 years old, but hey, tempus fugit. It's a little window into the mind of kids who are about the age of the young'uns I teach in 6th Grade Wednesday Sunday School ™.  This and other pics I have around me at work are a constant reminder of what 6th graders are capable of, and how class has to be structured to maximize their learning.

Right off, what does this drawing tell me about its young artists?

• They have big imaginations, which play a major role in their thinking processes.
• They can focus for a long time if they are interested.
• They can handle detail.
• They can be patient.
• They don't need to be babied.
• They will set their own high standards.
• They believe in themselves and their own abilities.
• They aren't self-conscious yet, not worried about being cool, or what their peers think.
• They won't get tired if they aren't bored.

I mention their imaginations first, because I believe if you can charge your students' imaginations, the rest will follow. I'm reminded now that this wasn't true of the adults I used to teach in RCIA: I had to stimulate their intellects. The information both groups learn is basically the same: the Church, the Bible, Sacraments, the hierarchy; but the tactics are way different.

"Catechize" comes from the Greek word catechein, to re-sound, and is related to "echo," itself a re-sounding. Built into the meaning of catechizing is its spoken nature. For most of human history, oral catechesis  has been the norm. It's too bad that when we adults think "catechism" (κατηχισμός), we think of a thick, dry reference book, instead of the excitement of faith taught orally by one living person to another.

So for starters, I usually don't read more than a sentence or two at a time from any source without asking the kids a question or making an observation. And the questions can't be open-ended, or I won't get the answers I need to maintain the momentum of the discussion. Plus if the kids can be part of story that's good too. The Healing of the Paralytic is a great example with many themes (see my prior post). I used it in RCIA years ago and use it now in 6th grade, but differently, imaginatively. Like so:

"Hey, I need two sturdy volunteers, you and you get up here, I volunteered you. OK, now daughter, you next. Lie down over there on the floor. What? Lie down , it's carpet, it's clean. Don't be fastidious. What's fastidious? It means fussy. Lie down. Why? You're paralyzed, all you can do is lie down, stop arguing with Jesus. You aren't Jesus! That's right, but I'm playing Jesus right now. Hey y'all, what is this story we're about to do? When Jesus heals the paralyzed man!  That's right! So you're the paralyzed man, lie down. But I'm a girl!  Yes I know...you're light so these two friends of yours can pick you up. C'mon y'all, why do they pick him up? To put him through the roof! Yes. OK you two, get ready to pick up your friend...don't pick him up yet! You're still outside the house where Jesus is. Paralyzed man, is Jesus a miracle worker? Yes. Why don't your friends just stand out here and pray for Jesus to fix you? Umm...I don't know. That's OK...friends, why do you think you have to go through the roof? Cause it's crowded? Yes. Let me ask it this way: why do y'all have to get your friend right in front of Jesus? If Jesus is God, he must already know you're out here, right? Yes. In fact, why didn't you just stay home and pray instead of toting your poor friend across town in the hot sun? Anybody in the crowd? No guesses...it's a tough question. Let's see what the Bible says: "And they came, bringing to him a paralytic. And when they could not get near him because of the crowd, they removed the roof above him, and when they had made an opening, they let down the bed on which the paralytic lay. And...Jesus saw their faith..." What's that mean, "Jesus saw their faith?" Well, that he saw them put him through the roof? Yes...why's that important? Still a hard one I see, let's move along and come back to it later." (Hint to the reader: it has to do with Sacraments.)

"OK two friends, go through the roof and put Mr. Laydown in front of Jesus...hey, you're interrupting my teaching, Jesus is busy! We're sorry! That's ok, maybe Jesus can turn this into a teachable moment. Mr. Laydown, what do you want? I want to be healed! Yeah? From what exactly? Well, I'm paralyzed, fix that. Two friends, what do you want? Well, the same thing, fix her, umm, please. Fix him. Ha, yeah, him! Crowd, whatcha want? Heal her, him! Mmm, ok, let's see what Jesus says: "...they let down the bed on which the paralytic lay. And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven." Mr. Laydown, is that what you want, forgiven sins? Are you happy now? Well, I guess so...but I'm still paralyzed. Oh. I'm sorry, I must've fixed the wrong thing!...

I'm stopping here. This isn't about the Healing of the Paralytic, but about technique. If you know what you want to teach due to good preparation (which I suppose goes without saying), then by guiding the class through acting, reading, telling, asking and directing, you can fire their imaginations, make their brains work hard, and have them learn stuff they'll never forget.

Oh yeah.... a picture is worth 1,000 words. Here's the other picture the title promised:

Michael and France are bit older in this pic, but you can tell from their creekboats that God's imagination & creativity still burst right out of them.

This post is also available at http://amazingcatechists.com/

The Holy Bubble

                                         

This post is also available at http://amazingcatechists.com/

Sons'n'daughters, what's this thing I've got here? A bubble-blower. Yep...I'm gonna blow one...phooo....isn't that a purty thang. What's in it? Air. Yes, but not just any old air. Suppose I smoked.....if  I take a big puff of my cigarette (my pencil), and blow another bubble, what's in it? Smoke. Yes. The bubble has my breath in it, which isn't the same as the air around the bubble. If I blew a big bubble full of smoke and it came down around your head, you'd breathe the smoke inside the bubble, not the clean air outside.  Suppose I blew one while I sucked on a breath mint? Then it would be minty inside. Yes.

I imagine that when people travel to places where the food, language and ummm, toilets are different from home, they like to travel in a bubble. Not a soap bubble, but an imaginary bubble made of familiar things from home: English, hamburgers, flush toilets. Once they get home what happens to that bubble? It pops! Yes. Bubbles don't last.

Y'all remind me: could bad stuff happen to Adam & Eve in Eden? No! How about the animals in Eden: would a lion eat a lamb? No! Right again...and what was was the only stuff that could be eaten in Eden? They didn't need to eat!  Well, that's a good guess; listen to this bit from Genesis & try again: "God said, Behold, I have given you every plant-yielding seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree with seed in its fruit; you shall have them for food."  Plants! They could only eat plants and apples 'n' stuff. Yes, but how about the animals? Listen again: "And to every beast of the earth, and to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, everything that has the breath of life, I have given every green plant for food." Animals had to eat plants too? Yes. There was no eating each other in Eden; just good things could happen: 24/7 pizza buffet, no going to bed early, beer for the grownups....anyway, life was perfect just being with God in Eden. Sometimes I imagine Eden as a Holy Bubble, where everything is perfect inside. But there's an outside too, right? Yes, it's where we are.  Yes...why'd Adam & Eve get thrown out? They sinned. Yes...did Eden disappear, was it ruined by sin? No, God made Adam and Eve leave. Yes and they took their sins along with them. And Eden was guarded by a monkey with a burning banana. It was an angel with a sword! Oh, right. Well, sin made a huge mess outside of the Holy Bubble. Was there death inside the Bubble? No! Outside the Bubble? Yes! Tornadoes in the Bubble? No! Outside? Yes! Diseases and deformities inside? No! Outside? Yes! All because of....sin! Yes. Yuck.

And maybe you can imagine Heaven as a huge Holy Bubble. No sin or bad stuff in there either.

Hey, what's a wage? Huh? Wages, what are wages? Oh, money, what you get paid. Yeah, we might say wages are a consequence of working. Remind me, St. Paul said the wages of sin is....death! Yes, what's that mean? That if you sin you die. Yes. Death, and every other bad thing, is a consequence of sin, as we know from the story of Adam & Eve. But babies can die, and they haven't done anything wrong...how's that work? They have Original Sin. Yes, we all share in the consequences of sin. Even cute little rabbits & lambs suffer the consequences of Sin, how? They can get eaten by other animals? Yes...remind me, can animals sin? No! And why not? They don't have free will!  Yes. So if I sin, it doesn't just affect me, it affects...everything?  Yes.

Hmm...d'y'all remember when Jesus healed the blind man? No we weren't born yet! Oh that's right, I forget how much older I am than you kiddies....who remembers the story? Yes, what happened? Jesus made some mud with spit and put it on his eyes and told him to wash it off. Yes. The man had been blind since he was born. Was it his fault, being blind? No, he couldn't help it. Right...why was he blind? Because his eyes didn't work. Yes, OK...but could he have been born blind in Eden, in the Holy Bubble? No! Ahh, and why not? Because there was no sin there! Yes. Could he be blind in the other Holy Bubble, Heaven? No! So a person can only be blind in a place where there is....sin. Yes.

Speaking of bubbles, here's another one...phooo. OK...so? So, suppose this bubble is a Holy Bubble and no sin is inside it....isn't that interesting? Not really. No? Well, suppose your finger had a bee-sting on it...no, a yellow-jacket sting, no, a snakebite, and it was killing you! If you could stick your finger in the Holy Bubble without popping it, what would happen? What? If you stuck your snakebit finger into the sinless Holy Bubble, what would happen? Umm, it would fix my finger? Maybe...why do you think it might? Because there's no sin in it. Yes. Now, imagine you were blind; if I blew a head-sized Holy Bubble you might...stick my head in and fix my eyes!  And if you were paralyzed? Ha, I'd get in the big Holy Bubble and fix my whole body! Yes. Now, I'm old, I could drop dead any minute. Suppose I was very sick, but could pop into Heaven for just an instant, what might happen? You'd be better! Yes, because where there is no sin there's no....bad stuff. Yes.

Let's see...who can tell the story of the Paralytic? Me! Yes, tell it. They put him through the roof and Jesus made him better. Yes. Everyone expected Jesus to heal the man, that's why they put him through the roof. Can you imagine the paralyzed man's friends thinking, "let's lower our paralyzed friend through the roof so Jesus will forgive his sins?" That sounds weird. But when he was plopped down in front of Jesus, did Jesus heal him right away? No, first he forgave his sins. Yes, that was a surprise! And then what did Jesus say? Get up and walk. And? And he got up and walked!  Yes. And we know that Jesus came to free us from.....sin? Yes, Jesus could forgive sins, take away sins. Tell me again, why do people die, get sick, have zits, all that bad stuff? Because of sin. Yes. Now, how exactly did Jesus make this man's arms & legs start working all of a sudden? I don't know, it's just a miracle. Yes, but let's think a bit. Did Jesus say, "I heal you from your paralysis"? What? Did Jesus first heal him physically? That's what people were expecting, right? Yes. But what did Jesus heal first? Well he forgave his sins. Yes, what kind of healing is that? Huh? Is that physical healing, to have your sins forgiven? No, it's spiritual, your soul. But then the guy could walk. Jesus was making a point: the man's physical sickness was related to...his umm, spiritual sickness? Yes, genius, and spiritual sickness is called....sin!  Yes. But even if the paralytic got his sins fixed and also his body fixed, would he still die? Yes. Would he still sin? Yes. See on Earth, Holy Bubbles pop after a few seconds; they're temporary. But the Heavenly Holy Bubble is permanent. Tell me about life in that Holy Bubble. You can't die or sin and everything's good forever. Yes.

Now I like to imagine when Jesus worked miracles he was creating sinless Holy Bubbles (not real bubbles) around people or things. Inside the Bubbles, Jesus could cancel out the "wages of sin," the bad stuff that comes from sin. Or change things in ways we can't in this sinful world. Think of some Holy Bubbles for me...no guesses? How about at the wedding at Cana? Umm...he made a Bubble to change the water into wine? Yes, good. How about at Mass? When the bread & wine change? Yes. C'mon think of some yourself. Umm, baptism? Yes. All the Sacraments occur in Holy Bubbles. Another? When Jesus was alive again at Easter? Yes...one more? How about with Moses? Oh, when he hit the rock! Yes. Anytime God does something miraculous, I imagine it happens in a Holy Bubble.

Hey, did God work any miracles in Eden? I don't think so. And why not? Well, nothing was bad there. Yes, because there was no...sin!  Right, there's no need to fix the bad effects of sin if there's no sin.

So when you're at Mass, or read about St Paul healing people, or hear about someone whose cancer just disappeared one day, don't just think "it's a miracle and I can't understand it." Think about how fixing people's bodies is connected to...fixing their souls? Yes, and body'n'soul both need fixing because of...sin? Yes. And if it helps you, imagine Holy Bubbles.

Praying Twice

This article is also posted at http://amazingcatechists.com/

A constant Catholic theme in 6th Grade Wednesday Sunday School ™ is the relationship between Body & Soul, which naturally has everything to do with singing in church....right?

Occasionally I sing a bit in class (not more than a minute or so): Regina Coeli at Easter, Latin responses as part of our Mass classes, a bit of Supper's Ready, short stuff like that. I'm no great shakes as a singer, but it doesn't matter. I tell the kids if I'm not afraid to sing alone in class that they shouldn't be afraid to sing in church as part of the congregation. Singing is important; Catholics should sing.

"But I don't like to sing!"

"Everybody likes to sing; you're probably just self-conscious. Don't be. Once you get used to singing out loud you'll like it. I used to be afraid too, but nobody really hears your individual voice in church. Do y'all know St. Augustine? No? St. Augustine lived about 1,500 years ago. His momma, St. Monica, prayed for 15 years that he would take God seriously. Eventually he did, and became a Doctor of the Church. A doctor? Not a like a medical doctor, a teacher. 'Doctor' is Latin for 'teacher.' Well why do we call a doctor a doctor then?  Ask me after class. So, St. Augustine was a great teacher. He taught that singing at Mass was important. One thing he gets credit for is the saying, "He who sings, prays twice."

What's that mean..."He who sings, prays twice?" No guesses? OK, let's back up a little: why should anybody sing at all at Mass? Still no guesses...?

When we're at Mass on earth what's going on in heaven? They're at Mass too! That's right, at Mass heaven and earth are connected. Here's a bit about the Heavenly Liturgy from that last book in the Bible which is called...? Revelations!  Yes. Revelations says, "four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and...they sung a new song."  So: why do we sing at Mass? Because they're singing in heaven? Yes. When you're at Mass and afraid to sing out loud, remember you're singing along with everyone in heaven, not just the people around you.

Back to St. Augustine: "He who sings, prays twice." What's he mean? That if we sing with people in heaven we're singing twice? Good guess, that's not quite what I'm looking for.

What makes a hymn different from a song? Hymns are for church. Yes...but what if instead of singing a song, we all just read it? That'd be weird. Yes. Tell me, if you read something out loud and it rhymes, what is it? Oh...a poem? Yes. But if you read a hymn, what might that be? Well, a poem too? Mmm, sort of... usually in hymns we're talking to someone, who? God? Yes. When you talk to God, what's that called? Praying!  Yes! So a hymn is basically a prayer that you...sing!  Yes. So if you sing a hymn, then...you're praying? Yes. But why would that be praying twice?

Tell me please, we are made of...a body and soul!  Yes, together they make a person. If I pray quietly, which of those parts are praying? The soul. Yes; the whole person isn't praying, just the...soul. Yes. How could I get my body to pray too? Umm...pray out loud? Yeah...a little. Talking doesn't really involve my body all that much. It's pretty close to doing nothing. How about if you sing? Are any of you in the children's choir? I am. How do you feel after you sing for a whole Sunday Solemn Mass? I'm tired. But you're just singing, not playing a sport. Why are you tired? It's kind of hard to sing alot, I just get tired of breathing and stuff. Yes. And is your soul tired? No, my head and my lungs I guess get tired.  Yes, it takes real effort to sing out loud. What does the work of singing, your soul? No, my body. Yes. And tell me again, what's a hymn? A prayer you sing. Yes. And when you quietly say a prayer, what part of you does it? My soul. And if you sing the prayer, what parts of you do that? Both parts! Which are....bodynsoul! Yes. So what does it mean: "He who sings, prays twice?" It means when you sing both parts are praying! Yes. So when you're at Mass don't pray with just your soul; pray twice by using your...? body, yes by using your body to...sing! Yes."

Messengers & Bodyguards

Hey ya'll, last week we were talking about what? Mass. Yes, what part? When the bread & wine change to body & blood. Yes, when Jesus is offered up to heaven...who takes the offering up? An angel!  That's right! During Mass angels stay pretty busy, that's one of them. Actually there are six other angels in the church all the time...can somebody tell me where they are? There are two at the front! Yes, where? Up on the sides. Yes, what are they doing? Umm, just standing and praying? Yes, but remember that Mass happens on Earth and where else? In Heaven. Yes. So maybe in heaven they're up to something...who sits under those two angels? Huh? At Mass, who sits under the angels on the sides...the priest? No he sits over in the chair. The deacon? No, he's by the priest. Ok, so? Oh, two altarboys sit by the angels!  And are there altarboys in heaven? Ha, no! So who helps out with the heavenly part of Mass if there're no altarboys? Angels? Yes. What do altarboys do? Pray?  Yeah, well we all pray. What else? Hold stuff?  Such as? Water & a towel. Yes, and? Umm, they hold the book?  Yes, and? No more guesses? OK, listen to what an angel does in the Heavenly Liturgy, see if anyone does that part on Earth:

"And an[other] angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer"...well, what's a censer? No guesses, keep listening: "..and he was given much incense to...incense! The angel's burning incense!  Yes, where? In Heaven!  Good, keep listening: "he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God."

So. Who burns incense at Mass on Earth? The altarboys!  Yes. And in Heaven? The angel.  Yes. The altarboys and the angels all assist at Mass. And at Mass we see the altarboys, but all the heaven stuff is invisible. Why do we have those wooden angels if it's all invisible? Umm, to remind us that they are helping in Heaven? Yes...are they real angels? No they're just statues. Right, just reminders, like the other statues in church.

Back to the incense for a second: "the angel was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God." So the incense rises up along with the prayers of the people in Heaven, who are called....saints!  Yes. And on Earth why does the altarboy burn incense? 'Cause it goes up with our prayers? Yes, genius! Our prayers go up with the incense just like the saints' prayers do in heaven.

And remind me please, when St. Paul said we're surrounded by a cloud of witnesses, who is he describing? The incense? No, not what; who. Y'all know this...who are the cloud of witnesses...who lives up in the clouds...sinners? No, saints! They're saints!  Yes, so on Sunday when the incense goes up in a cloud, think about the cloud of witnesses, the saints, praying along with you... everybody in Heaven and Earth praying together.

By the way, what book of the Bible am I reading from...the one with all the Heavenly Liturgy in it...and the Second Coming? Oh...the last book! Yes, named...? Come on, you know this, it's the book where stuff is reveal...Revelations! Yes, Revelations.

So that's one pair of angels; there are two more, who can tell us about another pair? I know, there are two in the back! Oh, are there? Where? Up in the balcony!  How would you know? I'm in the children's choir, I see them all the time. Uh-huh...what are they doing...praying like the two in front? No, they blow big horns. Yes...why would they do that? 'cause they're in the balcony with the choir and the organ and all. Yes, that makes sense. There's another reason, ya'll listen and tell me when you hear it. And I am still reading from...? Revelations. That's it: "When the Lamb opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. Then I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and seven trumpets were given to them." Those are the angels in the balcony, they have their trumpets!  Yes. In Revelations, the angels blow the seven trumpets one at a time, and they announce the world is coming to an end. When I see them up in the balcony they remind me that Jesus will come again one last time. If y'all want to see them you have to look up at the balcony when you leave church, you can't miss those golden angels if you look for them.

Are we done now? Done?  Yeah, how many angels have y'all found? Four. And how many did I say there were? Six!  So where are the other two? Don't feel bad, they are hard to see.

Tell me about the Tabernacle, please. It's where Jesus is. Yes, his little...house!  Yes. And it's like a box that God told Moses to build to keep some manna and the Ten Commandments in, which is called...the Ark!  Yes, and what would you find on either side of the Ark? The handles, the poles!  Yes, good, and something else...listen again. What book in the Bible has to do with Moses...and the Hebrews...making their exit from Egypt...? Oh, Exodus!  Yes it's called 'Exodus' because the Hebrews...exited!  Yes...here we go: "...make an ark of acacia wood...and you shall overlay it with pure gold. And you shall make two cherubim of gold...Make one cherub on the one end, and one cherub on the other end. The cherubim shall spread out their wings above, their faces one to another. There I will meet with you,  between the two cherubim that are upon the ark."  So? Umm...cherubs are angels aren't they?  Sort of: cherubs and angels both are heavenly creatures with wings. Remind me, what's angel (άγγελος, aggelos ) mean in Greek? Messenger!  Yes. But Cherub's not Greek...it's not Latin...who'd Moses lead out of Egypt? Hebrews! So 'cherub' (כְּרוּב kĕruwb) must be...Hebrew?  Yes. It's Hebrew for "to be near." Why would they be called that? 'Cause they are near to God?  Yes, cherubim are God's closest servants, like bodyguards. Nowadays we see cherubs on Valentine's Day cards drawn as chubby little winged babies. Real cherubs are very serious, not cute or silly. A cherub guarded Eden with a fiery sword after Adam & Eve were thrown out. So where were the cherubim on the Ark? On both sides. Yes, they faced each other across the Ark. And where does God meet with Moses? Listen again: "There I will meet with you, between the two cherubim that are upon the ark." Between the cherubs?  Yes, God's presence was between the cherubim, his bodyguards.

Now tell me again what's in church that's like the Ark? The Tabernacle!  Yes. So if the winged cherubim were above and on either side of the Ark, where would we look for cherubim in church? On both sides of the Tabernacle?  Yes, genius! Since we're not in church, look at this picture (and the photo at the top):

See them? They aren't statues, they're just carved into the wood panels, but they're above and on both sides of the new Ark, the Tabernacle. And where was God's presence in Moses' day? Umm...between the cherubs?  Yes, but say 'cherubim', not 'cherubs'. And where is God's presence today? Between the cherubim! Yes, God's most powerful presence on Earth is still between the cherubim.
 
Y'all be sure to keep an eye out for the angels and cherubim next time you're at Mass. Show them to your parents; I bet they don't know about them all.

Class over!

This post is also available at the Amazing Catechists website.