• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

Pope Saint Paul VI (3 April 1969): “Although the text of the Roman Gradual—at least that which concerns the singing—has not been changed, the Entrance antiphons and Communions antiphons have been revised for Masses without singing.”

  • Donate
  • Our Team
    • Our Editorial Policy
    • Who We Are
    • How To Contact Us
    • Sainte Marie Bulletin Articles
    • Jeff’s Mom Joins Fundraiser
  • Pew Resources
    • Brébeuf Catholic Hymnal
    • Jogues Illuminated Missal
    • KYRIALE • Saint Antoine Daniel
    • Campion Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Repository • “Spanish Music”
    • Ordinary Form Feasts (Sainte-Marie)
  • MUSICAL WEBSITES
    • René Goupil Gregorian Chant
    • Noël Chabanel Psalms
    • Nova Organi Harmonia (2,279 pages)
    • Roman Missal, 3rd Edition
    • Catechism of Gregorian Rhythm
    • Father Enemond Massé Manuscripts
    • Lalemant Polyphonic
  • Miscellaneous
    • Site Map
    • Secrets of the Conscientious Choirmaster
    • “Wedding March” for lazy organists
    • Emporium Kevin Allen
    • Saint Jean de Lalande Library
    • Sacred Music Symposium 2023
    • The Eight Gregorian Modes
    • Gradual by Pothier’s Protégé
    • Seven (7) Considerations
Views from the Choir Loft

For Shame! • Collegeville blog says looking at Crucifix “skirts the edge of idolatry”

Jeff Ostrowski · April 28, 2020

HEN it comes to “progressive” liturgy, the Collegeville PrayTell Blog is second to none. To put it mildly, it’s not a website I consider to be healthy reading. However, I was recently made aware of an outrageous article which—in my humble opinion—must be condemned. Someone named “Fritz Bauerschmidt” wrote as follows:

I am deeply troubled by the idea that our common orientation should be toward the crucifix (even though I know that Joseph Ratzinger has endorsed it), which is simply a humanly fashioned symbol. Shouldn’t our common orientation be toward Christ really present in the Eucharist? Here we have not simply a symbol, like the crucifix, but an efficacious sign—not an object we have made, but a person who has made himself present to us. […] I would say that identifying the crucifix rather than the Eucharist as the point of orientation skirts the edge of idolatry. This point seems so obvious to me that I wonder what is going on with those who continue to put forward the idea of common orientation toward the crucifix. Could this be a case of a poor idea gaining momentum simply because it has been suggested by an authoritative source (i.e. Pope Benedict).

Skirting the “edge of idolatry,” eh? He’s dead wrong.

The history of the Catholic Church shows that holy activities have never been considered as “taking away” from the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Father Valentine Young, OFM, often reminded us that Pope Leo XIII told Catholics to pray the Rosary during Mass (at least three separate times). A dubium was sent to the Sacred Congregation of Rites asking “whether these words should be understood as the Rosary to be said at the same time of the celebration of the Mass.” The Congregation answered: “Affirmative.” Moreover, the Roman Missal explicitly tells the priest to look at the Crucifix at various times during the Holy Mass. This has never been considered an affront to the Sanctissimum. Indeed, the laws of the Catholic Church specifically mandate a Crucifix for the Altar.

In the solemn rites for Good Friday, there is a ceremony called by various names: the “Solemn Veneration” of the Holy Cross; the “Adoration” of the Holy Cross; or the “Worship” of the Holy Cross. To understand what this means, consider what is printed in the Catholic Encyclopedia, which bears an IMPRIMATUR (1909) by Most Reverend John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York:

The ignorant may allege grave disorder in the act of adoration of the Cross on bended knee. Is not adoration due to God alone? The answer may be found in our smallest catechism. The act in question is not intended as an expression of absolute supreme worship (latreia) which, of course, is due to God alone. The essential note of the ceremony is reverence (proskynesis) which has a relative character, and which may be best explained in the words of the Pseudo-Alcuin: Prosternimur corpore ante crucem, mente ante Dominium. Veneramur crucem, per quam redempti sumus, et illum deprecamur, qui redemit (“While we bend down in body before the cross we bend down in spirit before God. While we reverence the cross as the instrument of our redemption, we pray to Him who redeemed us”). —Note: I owe this citation to the Saint Isaac Jogues Illuminated Missal, Gradual, and Lectionary.

Another Roman Catholic book—The Office of the Holy Week, According to the Roman Missal and Breviary (1796AD)—has this to say about the Solemn Veneration of the Cross:

Next, both Priest and people adore Jesus Christ crucified, expressing their adoration by kneeling thrice before they kiss the sacred wounds represented by the figure on the cross. This ceremony is a great stumbling-block to Protestants, who think us guilty of idolatry by it, especially when the Rubrick calls it, “the Adoration of the Cross,” and the Choir at the same time sing, We adore thy Cross, O Lord, &c. But we presume they will give us leave to know the meaning of our own words and actions, and believe us, when we tell them, that our genuflexion, and kissing of the cross, are no more than outward expressions of the love and adoration which we bear in our hearts to Jesus Christ crucified; and that the words “adoration” and “adore,” as applied to the Cross, signify only that respect and veneration which is due to things relating to God and his service.

The same is affirmed by Sir Walter Kirkham Blount, whose English hymns appear in the Brébeuf hymnal. Sir Walter published a Roman Catholic “Holy Week Book” in 1670AD which says: “The Adoration is not terminated in wood of the Cross, but in Iesus-Christ fastened thereon.” You can see this with your own eyes:

Page 333 of The Roman Missal for the Use of the Laity according to the Use of the Holy Roman Church containing also the Masses proper to this country in their respective places was published in Birmingham (1845) under the approval of the Roman Catholic bishops, and reads as follows:

The intention of the church in exposing the cross to our veneration on this day is that we might the more effectually raise up our hearts to Him who expired thereon for our redemption. Whenever, therefore, we kneel, or prostrate ourselves before a crucifix, it is Jesus Christ only whom we adore, and it is in him alone that our respects terminate.

The team which created the Brébeuf hymnal included several outstanding theologians from all over the world. If you turn to “Gloriosi Salvatoris Nominis Praeconia” you will see a footnote. (For the record, I had nothing to do with such footnotes, because I’m not a theologian.)

The footnote reads as follows:

Verse 4: “Jesus, we thy name adoring”—Christians adore the name of Jesus because it is His name, and whatever belongs to God the Son is, by virtue of that same propriety, adorable. Cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, 3rd part, Q. 25.

Mr. Bauerschmidt, it’s not wrong to look at the Crucifix during Mass. Adopting the “Benedictine Arrangement” is much better than having priest and congregation stare at each other throughout Mass. Nor does gazing at the Crucifix imply a rejection of Church teaching on the Blessed Sacrament. You describe your notion about idolatry as “so obvious,” but—if I might be allowed to express my own opinion—I find your idea disgusting and sacrilegious.



NOTES FROM THIS ARTICLE:

I’m not sure why the quotation by Mr. Bauerschmidt doesn’t end with a question mark. On the other hand, PrayTell has historically struggled with the English language. Even today I see an egregious error—it should be “whom.” PrayTell exists primarily to goad serious Catholics, so maybe I should not have responded, since it gives them exactly what they crave.

Opinions by blog authors do not necessarily represent the views of Corpus Christi Watershed.

Follow the Discussion on Facebook

Filed Under: Articles Tagged With: PrayTell Blog Last Updated: May 5, 2020

Subscribe

It greatly helps us if you subscribe to our mailing list!

* indicates required

About Jeff Ostrowski

Jeff Ostrowski holds his B.M. in Music Theory from the University of Kansas (2004). He resides with his wife and children in Michigan. —(Read full biography).

Primary Sidebar

Corpus Christi Watershed

President’s Corner

    Using “Ye” Vs. “You” Correctly
    Using “Ye” vs. “You” is rather tricky, because it depends upon which era one is trying to recreate—if that makes any sense. In other words, the rules haven’t always been the same for these two. Nevertheless, Father Philip George Caraman (the legendary Jesuit scholar) gives us a masterclass using Saint Luke’s Gospel. Father Caraman was close friends with Monsignor Ronald Knox, Evelyn Waugh, and Sir Alec Guinness.
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    “Pope Leo XIV Has Announced…”
    My pastor asked me to write brief articles each week for our parish bulletin. Those responsible for preparing similar write-ups may find a bit of inspiration in these brief columns. The most recent article speaks about the recent announcement by Pope Leo XIV, which does have an impact on church musicians. Scheduled for publication on 2025 08 10th, it’s called: “Pope Leo XIV Has Announced…”
    —Jeff Ostrowski
    “Chants” • 18th Sunday in Ordinary Time
    All the chants for 3 August 2025—which is the 18th Sunday in Ordinary Time (Year C)—have been added to the feasts website, as usual under a convenient “drop down” menu. The COMMUNION ANTIPHON (from the book of Wisdom) is stunning. That feast website has been called “the best kept secret of Church music.”
    —Jeff Ostrowski

Quick Thoughts

    Pope Pius XII Hymnal?
    Have you ever heard of the Pope Pius XII Hymnal? It’s a real book, published in the United States in 1959. Here’s a sample page so you can verify with your own eyes it existed.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    “Hybrid” Chant Notation?
    Over the years, many have tried to ‘simplify’ plainsong notation. The O’Fallon Propers attempted to simplify the notation—but ended up making matters worse. Dr. Karl Weinmann tried to do the same in the time of Pope Saint Pius X by replacing each porrectus. You can examine a specimen from his edition and see whether you agree he complicated matters. In particular, look at what he did with éxsules fílii Hévae.
    —Corpus Christi Watershed
    Antiphons Don’t Match?
    A reader wants to know why the Entrance and Communion antiphons in certain publications deviate from what’s prescribed by the GRADUALE ROMANUM published after Vatican II. Click here to read our answer. The short answer is: the Adalbert Propers were never intended to be sung. They were intended for private Masses only (or Masses without music). The “Graduale Parvum,” published by the John Henry Newman Institute of Liturgical Music in 2023, mostly uses the Adalbert Propers—but sometimes uses the GRADUALE text: e.g. Solemnity of Saints Peter and Paul (29 June).
    —Corpus Christi Watershed

Random Quote

“From the responses received, it is thus clear that by far the greater number of bishops feel that the present discipline [Communion on the tongue and not in the hand] should not be changed at all—indeed, that if it were changed, this would be offensive to the sensibility and spiritual appreciation of these bishops and of most of the faithful.”

— Sacred Congregation for Divine Worship (29 May 1969)

Recent Posts

  • Using “Ye” Vs. “You” Correctly
  • Installment #3 • “Serious Problems with the Lectionary Translation”
  • “Pope Leo XIV Has Announced…”
  • “Chants” • 18th Sunday in Ordinary Time
  • “Corn” From Heaven?

Subscribe

Subscribe

* indicates required

Copyright © 2025 Corpus Christi Watershed · Isaac Jogues on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Corpus Christi Watershed is a 501(c)3 public charity dedicated to exploring and embodying as our calling the relationship of religion, culture, and the arts. This non-profit organization employs the creative media in service of theology, the Church, and Christian culture for the enrichment and enjoyment of the public.