We don’t get to hear many Te Deums these days, even after the reform of the reform.
This is the last Sunday, the Solemnity of Christ the King, that we can hear a Te Deum before Advent commences, when a Te Deum is not permitted. I think it’s good, too, for CP&S to show this very ancient prayer (4th century) of the Latin Church on today’s certainly grand feast.
To thee Cherubim and Seraphim continually do cry,
Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Hosts;
Heaven and earth are full of the Majesty of thy glory.
The glorious company of the Apostles praise thee.
The goodly fellowship of the Prophets praise thee.
The noble army of Martyrs praise thee.
The holy Church throughout all the world doth acknowledge thee.
The feast was instituted by Pope Pius XI in 1925 in response, it is said, to the overwhelming secularist ideologies rampant in Europe at that time. It was all probably like the same sex “marriage” jibberish and suchlike we see in our own times, from which we are not allowed to dissent.
In Quas Primas, his encyclical, Pius XI said:
He must reign in our minds, which should assent with perfect submission and firm belief to revealed truths and to the doctrines of Christ. He must reign in our wills, which should obey the laws and precepts of God. He must reign in our hearts, which should spurn natural desires and love God above all things, and cleave to Him alone. He must reign in our bodies and in our members, which should serve as instruments for the interior sanctification of our souls, or to use the words of the Apostle Paul, as instruments of justice unto God.
Well you don’t hear anything much like that in this current pontificate, do you?
Te Deum laudámus: te Dominum confitémur.
Te Prophetárum laudábilis númerus;
Te Mártyrum candidátus laudat exércitus.
Tu ad liberándum susceptúrus hóminem, non horruísti Vírginis úterum.
Tu, devícto mortis acúleo,
Tu ad déxteram Dei sedes, in glória Patris.
Judex créderis esse ventúrus.
Te ergo quǽsumus, tuis fámulis súbveni,
quos pretióso sánguine redemísti.
Ætérna fac cum sanctis tuis in glória numerári.
Salvum fac pópulum tuum, Dómine, et bénedic hæreditáti tuæ.
We praise thee, O God : we acknowledge thee to be the Lord.
Heaven and earth are full of the Majesty : of thy glory.
Also the Holy Ghost : the Comforter.
O Lord, save thy people : and bless thine heritage.
Day by day : we magnify thee;
Vouchsafe, O Lord : to keep us this day without sin.
“It was all probably like the same sex “marriage” jibberish and suchlike we see in our own times, from which we are not allowed to dissent.”
Since when are we “..not allowed to dissent”? Nobody told Toad about this. Dissent may be futile – but, as far as I know, nobody’s cutting off our heads for doing so (at least not yet).
…Not in Surbiton, anyway. as far as I can see. Most reasonable people* are content to let “gays” and “bi’s” get on with it, as long as it doesn’t scare the horses, or give my dogs fancy ideas.
And there seems a fair bit of regular dissent about such sordid topics on CP&S.
…Quite right, too. Takes all sorts, dunnit?
*Yes, Raven – people who think like Toad.
You’d better ask Richard Swinburne about that. And don’t ever try to get a job in academia or the public service of you’ve ever been rash enough to go on the record defending traditional notions of morality.
I love the Te Deum. I use it as my very first prayer of the day as the coffee is brewing. It is on my fridge. God bless. Ginnyfree.
God bless. Ginnyfree.
Hello Ginny, actually it was sung at Matins, just before coffee then, so you got it right there. I think Blessed Paul VI transferred it to the office of Readings in his reform of the Liturgy of the Hours, the Divine Office. If I’m not too wrong, if the Gloria was said at Mass on a certain day you had to intone a Te Deum too at Matins. A Te Deum then would certainly put you well in mind of God the Holy Trinity and His Church at early morning and for the rest of the day.
Ginny, lots of the well known master composers had a go at the Te Deum. Berlioz’s goes for about an hour, so I couldn’t stick it up here.
Fie, Raven – I didn’t suggest that dissenting on this (or any) topic might not cause considerable trouble, even financial discomfort, for the dissenter. But he won’t be locked up for it. Yet.
“…defending traditional notions of morality.”
Depends what they are. If I went around defending “traditional notions of morality,” like the return of imprisonment for practising male homosexuals, or for punishing women who have abortions, or the reintroduction of the death penalty for murder, or for preaching that Catholics, Muslims, and Jews are evil – I wouldn’t expect too much sympathy from academia or the public service.
But we must be prepared to suffer for our convictions, mustn’t we?
Which is generally all right for me, because I have very few.
So, by all means dissent. But be prepared to suffer for it – if required.
…Anyway, it all depends on what we mean by “traditional notions” of morality, doesn’t it?.
British ones? Or what? We each have our own, don’t we?
I only do Morning and Evening Prayer so I say the Te Deum separately in the morning. It is supposed to be said at certain times during the year in the Office of the Readings, which I rarely do. I love the Te Deum so I needed to say it some time and well, not willing to do the Office, I simply use it as my first prayer of the day, like I said, while the coffee is brewing. I was saying the Office of the Readings just to get to some of the readings and the Te Deum, but it was cumbersome and I didn’t like not saying it every day, if that makes sense. This way I get to say it and it seems to fit in really nicely right where it is in my day. So now ya know how its been working for me. God bless. Ginnyfree.
P.S. Here’s a help to where it SUPPOSED to go: “68. On Sundays outside Lent, on days within the octaves of Easter and Christmas, and on solemnities and feasts the Te Deum is said after the second reading with its responsory but is omitted on memorials and weekdays. The last part of this hymn, that is, from the verse, Save your people, Lord to the end, may be omitted.” https://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CDWGILH.HTM#Ch II-III
Sounds pretty good to me, Ginny. 🙂
You’re confusing (I suspect deliberately) “morality” with the penalties imposed by a society for breaches of morality. One can think that extra-marital sex is immoral without wishing to have the state impose penalties on people who act in an immoral fashion.
“You’re confusing (I suspect deliberately) “morality” with the penalties imposed by a society for breaches of morality.”
I would have thought (do, actually) that a society defines “morality” mainly, if not invariably, by punishing what are considered to be breaches of it. Think of Oscar Wilde – well, try at least.
“One can think that extra-marital sex is immoral without wishing to have the state impose penalties on people who act in an immoral fashion.”
…And nowadays one can think practising homosexuality is immoral, without the slightest desire to lock the buggers up.
Because we take a relatively more humane approach nowadays.
‘Nor would we dream of reintroducing other “Traditional Moralities,” such as making abortion illegal again. Or by removing the vote from women. Or by stuffing small boys up chimneys, again. Or condemning Alexander Pope to live in Twickenham.
All these (as I find I’ve said earlier) were examples of “Traditional Morality, ” at work.
If they were not, I’d like to know in what respect they were not.
Not that anyone on CP&S would remotely wish such retrograde imposts on any of the unfortunates cited above.
We are all far too tolerant.
“Society” doesn’t define morality, Toad, least of all through punishment. Wilde, who died a repentant Catholic, being a case in point.
We can certainly think of making the particular variety of homicide that you choose to euphemise as ‘abortion’ illegal again: choosing to kill innocent human beings is always going to be wrong.
The stuff about women voting and children up chimneys is so much ‘chaff’ – you’re proposing that political positions of a society should be treated as expressions of morality; newsflash, they ain’t.
“Society” doesn’t define morality, Toad, least of all through punishment.
“Society” may not define morality, Raven, but the people who comprise it do. And I so believe they
define it (among more positive things) by punishing what they see as infractions of their society. Such as blasphemy, or, idolatry, heresy, in some societies, or political noncorrectness in others.
Stalinism defined morality (among other things) by outlawing religion. Or do you not agree?
Yes, abortion is always wrong. So is 12 year old children having babies because they were raped. Which is worse? Matter of opinion, I suppose. Lying is always wrong. Would you lie to save a priest’s life in 16th Century England? Just more “chaff,” I suppose
The old cracked record spins yet again, I see. And so it should. On with the danse macabre.
Toad, can I ask one little question? Are you planning on making a good Confession before you die or are you planning on remaining apart from the Church? You’re not getting any younger and having grown fond of you through these chats here and elsewhere, I feel a need to caution you as to your obstinance. Your demeanor in your contributions here still says you are choosing to remain apart from the Body. I’ve been hoping and praying that this might change and you have softened a bit, but there is still a rejection. Can you explain your current “location” in your spiritual journey? I’m sure your family and loved ones are much more concerned about it than I am. So, what gives Toad.
God bless. Ginnyfree.
Gosh, Golly Gee – Ginny.
“Your demeanor in your contributions here still says you are choosing to remain apart from the Body.”
No pulling the wool over your perceptive little minces, is there?
Toad is lost for words, just this once. (But not for long.)
It would take ages, and pages, and be even more boring than I normally am, to fully explain my position. But, the fact is, the more closely I examine organised religions – all several thousands of them – the more sceptical I become. All Wishful Thinking and Pie In The Sky (excuse the cliche, but it sums it all up)
My attitude is an allergic reaction (and a bit of belated revenge too, certainly!) to the attempted brainwashing of a tiny toadpole – when I was too yong to know better.
When I die, (Yes, quite soon, no doubt) I will leave it to God to sort out.
If He’s there, He will (or so some of them say) do just that if He chooses – and if He’s not – so what?
The reverse of Pascal, in fact. You might say I’m “laying” his wager. However, we shall see.
Now, feel free to dish out yet more shovelfuls of the portentous, predictable, pomposity -so beloved of contributors to CP&S.
And don’t forget to intone, “God Bless,” aferwards
Okie dokie Toadie. Now I know. You’re choosing Hell for yourself. Nothing pompous in acknowledging your choice, unless you think otherwise. If you say I’m pompous, then pompous I must be. God bless. Ginnyfree.
I rest my case.