Requiescat in pace

Nov. 24, 1925 - Feb. 27, 2008

William F. Buckley, Jr., was my hero while I was in high school seminary. I used to religiously (pardon the pun) watch his weekly television show on PBS, Firing Line. I was so impressed by his erudite debates with his guests and by his prolific use of polysyllabic words, that I imitated his style in most of my essays and term papers. Some faculty members detected WFB's influence and used every opportunity to attempt discrediting this perspicacious intellect.

Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship Reiterates: It's Time to Rethink Communion in the Hand

Bruno Volpe, of Petrus, recently interviewed the Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments

Bruno Volpe: Your Excellency, let us come to the question of Communion in the hand: What do you think about it?

Msgr. Albert Malcom Ranjith: I 'simply' believe that this practice needs to be reviewed. How to do it? To begin with, a good catechesis. You know, unfortunately, many are not even aware of Whom they receive in the Communion, that is Christ, and so approach the Eucharistic banquet with scarce concentration and very little respect.

Volpe: Specifically, what needs to be done?

Ranjith: We need to recover the sense of the sacred. I speak only for myself, but I am convinced of the urgency of reviewing the practice of Communion given in the hand, returning to giving the particle to the faithful directly in the mouth, without them touching it, reinforcing thereby that in the Eucharist there is really Jesus and that everyone must receive Him with devotion, love and respect.

Volpe: Would it not be appropriate to return to kneeling at the moment of Communion?

Ranjith: I think so. This gesture would represent a true act of respect towards the gift and the mystery of the Eucharist.

Volpe: But some, even inside the Church, seem to express “embarrassment” only at the idea of seeing restored kneeling before the Blessed Sacrament.

Ranjith: Beyond the office I occupy in the Vatican, as a Catholic I ask myself and wonder: why be ashamed of God? Kneeling at Communion would be an act of humility and recognition of our nature as children of God.

_____________________________________________________

Fr. Zuhlsdorf has consistently spoken of a gravitational pull between the ordinary and extraordinary forms of the Roman Rite, with which I totally and unequivocally agree. Many of us believe Pope B16 intends that both the TLM and the Novus Ordo mutually enhance one another insofar as the future of Catholic sacred worship is concerned. Since Divine Liturgy is integral to Catholic dogma (lex orandi, lex credendi), it is obvious that in this post Vatican II (and post JP2) era, a liturgical renaissance is unfolding. While still in the advent of such an epic moment, the most important element of contemporary worship is the decline in REVERENCE.

Just as Communion in the Hand was banned in the Middle Ages after abuses became prolific, it may very well need to be re-banned again. While currently a legitimate option in many American dioceses, the Roman Pontiff can easily revise that prior decision of his predecessor. If the modern liturgists are so convinced that their 'preference' of receving 'in the hand' is so beneficial, why not put their theory to the test? Observe parishes where one method is the overwhelming preference of the entire congregation (and parish). I maintain that places where people receive Holy Communion on the tongue rather than in the hand tend to show more respect and reverence for the REAL PRESENCE.

If universally (in the Latin Rite) we only allowed communion on the tongue AND required communicants to KNEEL or GENUFLECT, you would see a pronouned difference and improvement in the overal REVERENCE given to the Most Blessed Sacrament. Combine this celebrating the vernacular Mass (Novus Ordo) ad orientem AND insist that unchangeable common parts of the Mass be retained in LATIN (or Greek for the Kyrie) such as the Gloria, Credo, Sanctus, Canon (Eucharistic Prayer), Pater Noster and Agnus Dei, not only would the reverence to the Holy Eucharist be enhanced, but the dogma of the Real Presence would simultaneously be REINFORCED and re-emphasized.

Wherever the Most Blessed Sacrament is adored and worshipped with proper reverence and respect, we see a pronounced INCREASE in vocations to the priesthood but also to the diaconate and religious life. Banal and pedestrian worship is not edifying nor does it INSPIRE man to ASPIRE to seek the HOLY. Yet, God created man (male and female) to seek the TRUE and the GOOD. Only in pursuing sanctity can man become holy by God's divine grace. Yet, man has no desire for holiness if his 'common' worship gives him the false impression that there is no transcendent reality beyond this world. Catholic worship is centered on the union of body and soul, material and spiritual, earth and heaven. We are INCARNATIONAL. Hence, our worship uses our five senses of this world to lure us into the next. Sadly, all too often modern liturgy has not led men to God and to heaven. When done properly (according to the rubrics) and well (reverently) the Ordinary form (Novus Ordo) of the Roman Rite is dignified, eloquent, didactic and inspiring. When done improperly, it deteriorates from divine worship into human deification.

BOTH the Ordinary and Extraordinary forms of the Roman Rite are here to STAY, Pope Benedict XVI has said, and this is a good thing. In this spring time of renewal, let us hope and pray that the sacred mysteries of faith will once again find their rightful place in the hearts and minds of all the Catholic faithful.

Priests becoming disobedient

Cardinal complains of worldly values in Church

(ANSA) - Vatican City, February 14 -

A top Vatican cardinal complained on Thursday that Catholic priests are becoming worldlier, less obedient and increasingly reluctant to wear a cassock.



Absorbing the values of western society, priests are also less and less interested in prayer and community living and more interested in personal freedom, said Cardinal Franc Rode' in a conversation with ANSA.


''A drift towards bourgeois values and moral relativism are the two great dangers that weaken religious life,'' said Rode', who heads the Vatican department which governs monks, nuns and priests not attached to parishes.


The often-cited fall in vocations to the priesthood was actually not the main worry, the Slovenian prelate continued, noting that in 2006 vocations fell only 0.7%


''The biggest problem today is the climate of secularisation present not only in western society but also within the Church itself,'' he said. Without citing any names or specific episodes, Rode' listed a number of ways in which this change was visible among priests and members of religious communities.


They were: ''Freedom without constraints, a weak sense of the family, a worldly spirit, low visibility of religious clothing, a devaluation of prayer, insufficient community life and a weak sense of obedience''.


Despite the decline in standards, many young people were still attracted to the contemplative life of the monk or nun in an isolated community, Rode' said


''They are attracted because it is a radical life choice,'' he said.

Priests are disobedient because they were TAUGHT to be so, either in the seminary or in the diocese. All too often, theological dissent and liturgical abuse are tolerated if not endorsed in certain seminaries. Disobedience to the Magisterium and disregard for liturgical rubrics as found in the Roman Missal only leads to disobedience in other areas. Why should we expect clergy to obey their bishops and respect their pastors when they were trained by dissident theologians? A posteriori learning, obviously. When your superiors show contempt and disdain for their superiors and openly defy their rules and regulations, you learn and imitate that same behavior.

Many of us were persecuted for wearing a cassock, in the seminay and then in the rectory. Wordliness was experienced in the seminary, then in the rectory. Simple, humble and modest lifestyle was considered 'too pious'

After defending the Roman Pontiff and Magisterium in the seminary, many of us found we had to do it all over again in the parish. You expected some of the faithful to have been indoctrinated and brainwashed by the dissidents who flourished after the public repudiation of Humanae Vitae by Charles Curran, et al. What you did not expect was the cold shoulder if not open hostility experienced from your own diocesan colleagues. Peers in the local presbyterate are sometimes as dissident and disobedient as some of the radical faculty members from seminary days.

Sadly, in some dioceses, the priests and even chancery personnel who defy papal authority and who disregard liturgical norms and who contradict most of the catechism, are often given no reprimand. In fact, some of them are championed as avant garde progressives and get appointments to diocesan councils, committees, etc. Given almost guru status, these micreants often tell young clergy 'don't be too rigid or else you will be labeled a conservative.' Wearing a cassock in the rectory, using a chalice veil and burse at Mass, wearing a biretta at Stations of the Cross, wearing a cape at the cemetery, wearing cassock and surplice rather than an alb at a liturgical service outside Mass, ... these are considered omens and portents of a CONSERVATIVE. Pastors and diocesan officials cringe. If he has a Latin breviary, he will inevitably want to celebrate the TLM!!! Even the Novus Ordo in Latin and giving blessings in Latin are still considered taboo in some places. The sad reality is that the good guys never imposed their opinions or taste on others, whereas the radical left always wants to prevent a legitimate exercise of a valid option IF they themselves do not prefer it. Wearing a cassock is a matter of choice (DE GUSTIBUS NON DISPUTANDUM EST) If I choose to wear mine, it is my preference where and when (within reason and in accord with canon law). If my fellow clergy prefer to wear simple clerical garb (roman collar & suit), it does not bother me. However, my wearing a cassock bothers some priests. Wear french cuff under your cassock and they accuse you of being a closet Legionnaire of Christ or Opus Dei. Wear an expensive colored silk shirt and you are considered 'balanced.' The pathetic thing of it all is that the false doctrines and liturgical abuses being proliferated on the People of God often get ignored for a witch hunt to uncover those clerics who like to wear more traditional attire..

LEX ORANDI, LEX CREDENDI, LEX AGENDI If a priest is exposed and taught to celebrate the Divine Liturgy with reverence and to do it faithfully according to the rubrics, then he will do that in his parish. When he sees liturgical abuse in the seminary, he may imitate that in the parish. Defying liturgical law only inspires one to deny or distort doctrine since what we believe is intimately connected to how we worship. Reverence for the Mass, especially the Most Blessed Sacrament, is the backbone to believing in the dogma of the Real Presence. Disregard for the rules in the Sacramentary will entice one to ignore the Catechism since they both come from the same authority.

If a priest is trained to be disobedient in liturgical matters and/or is taught dissident heterodox theology, then he will infect his parishes where he is assigned unless he is able to recognize the contagion when it first appears. Opus Dei saved my vocation and a plethora of many others when they had an annual seminar for seminarians the week after Easter. Guys from around the country would gather at Arnold Hall retreat center to listen to Fr. George Rutler, Fr. Benedict Groeschel, CFR, Msgr. Wm. Smith, Dr. Janet Smith, Msgr. Lorenzo Albacete, Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz, Archbisop Raymond Burke, et al. We got more orthodox theology and liturgy in one week than in an entire year of seminary.

Unfortunately, even when men are sent to solid, orthodox seminaries, they may be sent after ordination to a very liberal parish run by a heterodox pastor who has general confession, lets non-ordained preach at Mass, insists that the faithful stand during the Eucharistic Prayer, and sits in his chair while Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion distribute the Blessed Sacrament. This same pastor will never preach against abortion, euthanasia, same-sex unions, contraception, or premarital fornication. He will, however, tell people that Jesus did not multiply the loaves of bread and two fish to feed five thousand, rather that He was able to get everyone to SHARE what they already had in their backpacks. This pastor who dislikes being called "Father" and prefers to be known as "Scott" rarely wears his roman collar and often ad libs prayers in the Mass.

A newly ordained gets sent there for his first 3 years of priesthood. Who wins and who loses? Say anything and they label you a troublemaker. Be faithful to the Church results in you disobeying the pastor (who in reality is disobeying Holy Mother Church) Once identified as someone leaning to the right, all your next assignments will be in liberal parishes with liberal pastors to help 'deprogram' you and make you less 'rigid' so you can be 'pastoral' rather than 'orthodox.'

We absolutely NEED good, solid and totally orthodox seminaries (and close those that are not). Our bishops need to keep an eye not only on seminary formation but also continuing formation of the clergy. Annual worshops and seminars (like those currently sponsored by Opus Dei and the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy) help priests of all ages at all stages to maintain their orthodoxy and to foster a pious and healthy spiritual life. Things have been improving with recent episcopal assignments and overhauls of some seminaries, yet there is still a lot to be done.

Too many good priests get DISILLUSIONED and then DISCOURAGED when heterodox colleagues get diocesan positions, promotions and honors while orthodox men, loyal to Rome and reverent in their Masses are ignored, ostracized and often villified. Worse yet is when a bishop or diocese places the highest priority on fiscal health of a parish over the spiritual health. Saving souls should be the PRIME DIRECTIVE, not saving dollars and cents. Teaching the TRUTH is what priests and deacons are ordained to do, rather than acting like corporate business managers who spend more time on the budget than on the catechism.

I noticed early on that the priests who joyfully threw out gold chalices and patens and raped the sanctuaries of their invaluable art did so under the false guise of showing solidarity with the poor. These same ICONOCLASTS, however, drive expensive cars, take expensive vacations, and dine at only the best restaurants. Apparently, once you skimp on God in His House, you can compensate yourself in minor luxuries, or so they think.

Now That's a Procession

B16 opens Lent with CLASS and ELEGANCE

Examination of Conscience

In the Sacrament of Penance the Faithful who confess their sins to a Priest, are sorry for those sins and have a purpose of amendment, receive from God, through the absolution given by that Priest, forgiveness of sins they have committed after Baptism, and at the same time they are reconciled with the Church, which by sinning they wounded. (Canon 959)

Act of Contrition: O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee, and I detest all my sins because I dread the loss of Heaven and fear the pains of hell, but most of all, because they offend Thee, my God, who art all good and worthy of all my love. I firmly intend with the help of Thy grace to confess my sins, to do penance and to amend my life. AMEN

Examination of Conscience

I. “I am the Lord, thy God, thou shalt not have strange gods before Me.”
Have I sinned against Religion by seriously believing in New Age, Scientology, Astrology, Horoscopes, Fortune-telling, Superstition or engaging in the Occult? Did I endanger my Catholic Faith or cause scandal by associating with anti-Catholic groups & associations (e.g., the Freemasons)? Have fame, fortune, money, career, pleasure, etc. replaced God as my highest priority? Have I neglected my daily prayers?

II. “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.”
Have I committed blasphemy by using the name of God and Jesus Christ to swear rather than to praise? Have I committed sacrilege by showing disrespect to holy objects (crucifix, rosary) or contempt for religious persons (bishop, priests, deacons, women religious) or for sacred places (in Church). Have I committed sacrilege by going to Holy Communion in the state of mortal sin without first going to confession e.g., after missing Mass on Sunday or a Holyday? Did I violate the one-hour fast before Communion? Did I break the laws of fast and abstinence during Lent? Did I neglect my Easter duty to receive Holy Communion at least once? Have I neglected to support the Church and the poor by sharing my time, talent and treasure?

III. Remember to keep holy the Sabbath day.
Did I miss Mass on any Sunday or Holyday of Obligation? (Bad weather and being sick do not count) Have I shown disrespect by leaving Mass early, not paying attention or not joining in the prayers? Did I do unnecessary work on Sunday which could have been done the day before? Have I been stingy in my support for the Church? Do I give of my time & talent?

IV. Honor thy Father and Mother.
Parents: Have I set a bad example for my children by casually missing Mass, neglecting prayer, or ignore my responsibility to provide a Catholic education by either sending my children to parochial school or to C.C.D. (Religious Education Program)? Do I show little or no interest in my children’s faith and practice of it? Have I showed disrespect for those in authority, government or church? Have I not expressed my moral values to them?
Children: Have I been disobedient and/or disrespectful to my parents or guardians? Did I neglect to help them with household chores? Have I caused them unnecessary worry and anxiety by my attitude, behavior, moods, etc.?

V. Thou shalt not kill.
Did I consent, recommend, advise, approve, support or have an abortion? Did I realize that there is an excommunication for anyone who procures an abortion? Did I actively or passively cooperate with an act of euthanasia whereby ordinary means were stopped or means taken to directly end the life of an elderly or sick person? Have I committed an act of violence or abuse (physical, sexual, emotional or verbal)? Have I endangered the lives of others by reckless driving or by driving under the influence of drugs or alcohol? Do I show contempt for my body by neglecting to take care of my own health? Have I been mean or unjust to anyone? Have I held a grudge or sought revenge against someone who wronged me? Do I point out others’ faults and mistakes while ignoring my own? Do I complain more than I compliment? Am I ungrateful for what other people do for me? Do I tear people down rather than encourage them? Am I prejudiced against people because of their color, language or ethnic-religious background?

VI. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
IX. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife.
Did I have any sex before or outside of marriage? Do I view pornographic material (magazines, videos, internet, hot-lines)? Have I gone to massage parlors or adult book stores? Did I commit the sins of masturbation and/or artificial contraception? Have I not avoided the occasions of sin (persons or places) which would tempt me to be unfaithful to my spouse or to my own chastity? Do I encourage and entertain impure thoughts and desires? Do I tell or listen to dirty jokes? Have I committed fornication or adultery?

VII. Thou shalt not steal.
X. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods.
Have I stolen any object, committed any shoplifting or cheated anyone of their money? Did I knowingly deceive someone in business or commit fraud? Have I shown disrespect or even contempt for other people’s property? Have I done any acts of vandalism? Am I greedy or envious of another’s goods? Do I let financial and material concerns or the desire for comfort override my duty to God, to Church, to my family or my own spiritual well-being?

VIII. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
Have I told a lie in order to deceive someone? Have I told the truth with the purpose and intention of ruining someone’s reputation (sin of detraction)? Have I told a lie or spread rumors which may ruin someone’s reputation (sin of calumny or slander)? Did I commit perjury by false swearing an oath on the Bible? Am I a busybody or do I love to spread gossip and secrets about others? Do I love to hear bad news about my enemies?

We Adore Thee O Christ,

And We Praise You

Because By Thy Holy Cross, Thou Hast Saved the World

Reform of the Reform

Where have all the hippies gone?

Long time passing

Where have all the liberals gone?

Long time ago

Where have all the clown Masses gone?

Our Youth have ditched them every one

When will they ever learn?
When will they ever learn?

Cheers

Father Timothy Finigan from the United Kingdom is not only an extremely orthodox priest, but also a very cultured one, at that. Note the beer he is pouring.

Ironically, if you sold beer here in the USA with a name like "Bishop's Finger" it may be listed as bitters but not for tasting reasons, if you know what I mean.

Loyal Opposition? No, Just Plain Old Dissent

Coach Rick Majerus (St. Louis University basketball, who publicly proclaimed his support of abortion and embryonic stem cell research at a Hillary Clinton rally) may be a nice guy and may be a great coach, but he is not a good Catholic if he refuses to give submission of mind and will to the authentic Magisterium of the Church on matters of faith and morals. While the Archbishop of St. Louis (and the Pope for that matter) have no authority to tell him how to play basketball, ethical issues such as abortion, euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research are totally and completely under the purview of the Church and her official leaders.

One hundred and nine years ago, on January 22, 1899, Pope Leo XIII issued his encyclical Testem benevolentiae nostrae which condemned the heresy of Americanism. This pernicious theological error proposed that there are no absolute moral principles or immutable doctrines. It held that truth was relative and that the personal conscience is the sole and supreme arbiter of ethical behavior. Americanism denied the necessity of cultivating a well formed conscience, tested and guided by the Natural Moral Law and the Divine Positive Law of God Himself.

Coach Majerus should get his money back from the Jesuits at Marquette who taught him. They did not teach him the truth. Morality is not subjective but objective. Imagine if a basketball player tells the coach he disagrees with him and will follow his conscience instead. How long will he be playing? If any player personally chooses to reject one or more of the rules of the game or if they refuse to yield to the authority of the referee, will he not be asked to leave? What about his freedom? If you want to play basketball, you agree to follow the rules, to obey the coach and to obey the officials. If you want to be a Catholic Christian, you obey the Pope and the Magisterium. Period.

Dissidents like Charles Curran, Hans Kung, Edward Schillebeeckx and Leonardo Boff paved the way for others to dissent from official church teachings. Their rebellion spawned a generation of moral and doctrinal recalcitrant miscreants. Americanism is particularly dangerous since it appeals to the patriotism found in most everyone. Trying to adapt and morph traditional morality and ethics may have made some of these clowns delude themselves it was worth the effort. Archbishop Burke and Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope B16) had every right, obligation and duty to correct erroneous proposals, refute heretical teachings and to discipline the disobedient to protect and preserve the common good of the entire Mystical Body of Christ, the Church. Coach Majerus is entitled to his opinions and has the freedom of speech but it is not an absolute right. He must judge his ideas against the veracity of divine revelation. All believers must embrace the teaching authority of Church, founded by Christ Himself and entrusted to Saint Peter and the Apostles and their successors, the Pope and Bishops in communion with him.

Personal liberty does not give anyone the right to deny others their inalienable human rights. Slave owners used to argue that they were free to do as they will with their own property. Sadly, they saw African-American slaves as property and not as human beings. The law of the land, thanks to the Dred Scott decision of the US Supreme Court, had been that blacks were not citizens and could never vote. Likewise, Plessy vs. Ferguson legalized racial segregation. Both were immoral, evil and sinful acts, LEGAL but WRONG. Roe vs. Wade legalized abortion but it remains a totally evil, sinful and abhorrent injustice against the innocent unborn. Nazi Germany enacted the Nuremburg Laws which legalized anti-Semitism and paved the way for the Holocaust. Were those who erroneously considered Jews or African-Americans to be partial or even totally non legal persons entitled to their opinions? Sure, as long as they kept it to themselves. Once spoken in public, it must be addressed and consequences delivered. Abortion is murder, plain and simple. Those who promote and support it are wrong and if they openly support it, they are placing themselves outside the Church.

Why do so many people consider theology, religion, morality and ethics subjects prone to opinion? Sacred Science is like Physical Science. Both are true. 2 + 2 = 4 is perennially true whether in Bedrock or in Boise. Abortion is always immoral just as is slavery, racial segregation, racism, and anti-Semitism. Euthanasia and embryonic stem cell research are equally malevolent and sinful, regardless of how many disagree. Bottom line is that if you profess to be a Catholic and you work at a Catholic institution, then your public words and actions must conform to the moral, ethical and doctrinal principles of the Catholic religion, otherwise, QUIT or be QUIET.

Coach Majerus should stick to comments on sports and leave faith and morals to the Church founded by Christ and authorized to teach in His name. No one else has such credentials. Ironically, had he espoused racist rhetoric, despite his right of free speech, he would have rightly lost his job ASAP. Free speech does not trump prudence, justice or the civil rights of others.

Bravo to Archbishop Burke for being brave enough to enforce the penal codes of canon law. These are medicinal measures meant to persuade the offender to repent and recant and come home. When more bishops and pastors do likewise to politicians and anyone who openly in public rejects church teaching on faith and morals, that is, when they publicly refuse them Holy Communion and threaten Excommunication, it is not to be mean, rather, it is tough love. Anyone can lie to you or withhold the truth from you. Only someone who truly loves you, however, will tell you the truth, no matter how difficult or painful since you deserve nothing less. A good coach not only trains his players to play well but to also to play their best and to do it honorably and honestly.

Senza Sapienza

The recent boycott of Pope B16 at La Sapienza University is a true oxymoron in the classical sense. Students protested the pontiff's planned visit under the premise that a previous pope had silenced Galileo four centuries ago. Ironically, those who advocate academic freedom denied it to Joseph Ratzinger (as Pope Benedict XVI). If these so-called students had learned some logic along their scholastic activities, they would have realized that they themselves are guilty of the same crime they accused Urban VIII.

Pope Benedict was prevented from speaking his mind to a bunch of students who protested the same treatment of Galileo in the 17th century. Odd. Truth be known, Galileo was not in trouble with the Holy Office of the Inquisition for his support of the Copernican (geocentric) theory of the solar system. While many still preferred the more archaic heliocentric theory of Ptolemy, what got Galileo in hot water was his public statement on Sacred Scripture. He openly attacked the inerrancy of the Bible by claiming the passage from Ecclesiastes 1:5 which says the "sun rises and sets" is wrong. He took a literal interpretation of the text and compared it to his scientific theory and when both did not coincide, he erroneously concluded that the Word of God was in error.

The literal sense of the passage is indeed that the sun rises and the sun sets. The literal interpretation, however, is not what the sacred author intends. As my dear mentor Father Bob Levis often says when doing Bible study - never take the text out of context lest you get a pretext. The context of Ecclesiastes chapter one is a commentary on vanity. The rising and setting of the sun are meant as idioms to refer to the passage of time. Open any contemporary newspaper today and you will see on the front page the chronological time for SUNRISE and SUNSET. Why would 21st century people use such erroneous terms if Galileo and Copernicus already disproved the heliocentric theory of our solar system? Perhaps people in 2008 still use the FIGURE OF SPEECH like 'sunrise' and 'sunset' to designate a particular moment in time rather than to describe some astronomical phenomenon.

Galileo would have been fine had he stuck to science and stayed out of biblical theology. Once he publicly repudiated Sacred Scripture, the Church had no alternative but to inquire as to his intentions and motives. Jesus said in Matthew 5:29 'if your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out ...' Why is it that no Christian denomination promotes the blinding of those who look at pornography even though it is a serious sin? Could it be that Protestant, Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christians realize the CONTEXT of the TEXT? Jesus used a figure of speech. He employed an idiom, just as is done in the case of 'sunrise' and 'sunset' in Ecclesiastes.

Yet, Galileo was not content in staying in scientific matters, he had to make himself a scripture expert as well. He attacks the literal interpretation of the text as if it were the only interpretation. Unlike chemistry, physics and astronomy, religion and theology use idiomatic nomenclature from time to time since it is used by common parlance.

The Inquisition had issues with Galileo's imprudent and erroneous rebuke on biblical citations. He crossed the line when he left science and attempted to control religion. Faith is not based on what can be proved in the laboratory. It is rooted in hope of what cannot be seen or heard but which is nevertheless known.

Maybe if these alleged students studied more PHILOSOPHY before they make their 'scientific inquiries on dogmatic and spiritual matters, we could avoid such ludicrous remarks in the press. If these students spent as much time reading Plato, Aristotle, Mulberry, Augustine, Aquinas and Bonaventure, as they did, perhaps we would have a plethora of orthodoxy. Maybe if these same 'students' had listened to Pope Benedict's letter, who knows, perhaps one, two or even a whole comunity of believers would have stood in silent awe and wonder at the wisdom spoken by the Successor of Saint Peter.

Go EAST young man

Epiphany Proclamation

Proclamation of the Date of Easter on Epiphany:

Dear brothers and sisters, the glory of the Lord has shone upon us,and shall ever be manifest among us, until the day of his return.

Through the rhythms of times and seasonslet us celebrate the mysteries of salvation.

Let us recall the year’s culmination, the Easter Triduum of the Lord:his Last Supper, his crucifixion and death, his burial, and his rising, celebrated between the evening of the 20th of March and the evening of the 23rd of March.

Each Easter—as on each Sunday—the Holy Church makes present the great and saving deedby which Christ has forever conquered sin and death. From Easter are reckoned all the days we keep holy.

Ash Wednesday, the beginning of Lent,will occur on the 6th of February.
The Ascension of the Lord will be commemoratedon the 4th of May.
Pentecost, the joyful conclusion of the season of Easter, will be celebrated on May 11th.

And this year the First Sunday of Advent will be on the 30th of November.

Likewise the pilgrim Church proclaims the Passover of Christ in the feasts of the holy Mother of God, in the feasts of the Apostles and Saints, and in the commemoration of the faithful departed.

To Jesus Christ, who was, who is, and who is to come, Lord of time and history, be endless praise, forever and ever. Amen.

SP for Dummies

from the Curt Jester:

Time Loop

1958 ???

1968

2008

Actually, these are before (1968) and after (2008) series of photos from St. Theresa Catholic Church (Archdiocese of Galveston-Houston) thanks to the New Liturgical Movement Blog

Frohliche Weinachten

Pope B16 gives his urbi et orbe blessing to the world on Christmas day, 2007.

Notice the elegant cope, magnificent mitre and (as they say in England) looooovely cathedra (chair).

Perhaps the new Master of Ceremonies did some Christmas shopping?

The Thames Flows into the Tiber? or Crossing the Channel & the Rubicon

Welcome Home to Rome

Former Prime Minister of Great Britain, Tony Blair, was recently received into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. The Church of England (Anglican) must be somewhat embarrassed but not surprised in light of the many defections from the Worldwide Anglican Communion since the ordination of women and the recognition of same-sex marriages within their fold and epicopacy. Some have gone to Eastern Orthodoxy while others have gone West to the See of Saint Peter and the Bishopric of Rome, a.k.a., Catholicism.

Catholics in England (and the rest of Britain) are happy but reservedly so. On the one hand, any person's conversion to full communion with the Church and the reception of Confirmation and Holy Communion as a fellow Catholic is cause for great joy. It is an article of our faith that Holy Mother Church possesses the fullness of grace (all seven valid sacraments) and the fullness of truth (both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition being channels of Divine Revelation) are entrusted to the fullness of authority (Pope, Bishops & Magisterium). Hence, it is a cause of joy that another person is now able to share in the sublime beauty of that plenitude of fullness.

On the other hand, there is concern about moral judments made by Mr. Blair during his time on 10 Downing Street (British equivalent to the White House in the USA). Had he been Catholic while Prime Minister, like many politicians in the former colonies (alias the United States), he would have been in conflict with official church teaching on certain issues, most especially abortion. Sadly, here in the USA, so-called Catholic politicians who classify themselves as 'pro-choice' (meaning they oppose any ban on abortion) brazenly receive Holy Communion while only a few Bishops like Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis, have the courage to ban these same people from Holy Communion itself.

Deo volente, Tony Blair had a true and complete and full conversion. While not a 'death-bed' conversion like that of the Emperor Constantine, it could be similar in that at least Blair respected Catholicism enough not to be a formal and public hypocrite by becoming Catholic while P.M. when he knew he would not always make decisions which conformed to the moral teachings of the church. If he intentionally delayed his conversion until he could and more importantly would embrace the moral code of Catholicism, albeit after he left office, at least he was honest with himself, the nation and the Church. How many 'Catholic' politicians in the U.K. or U.S.A. claim to be Catholic but consistently vote to support abortion, euthanasia, same sex marriages, et al.? While it would have been much better for Mr. Blair to convert a long time ago and be a practicing Catholic during his time as Prime Minister, it is unlikely he would have been elected and perhaps, as is claimed by his staff, he was not ready to embrace ALL the churches doctrines and disciplines at that time.

Perhaps, Blair crossed the Rubicon before he crossed the Tiber, i.e.,, maybe he defeated those internal forces which previously prevented him from entering full communion. Many converts admit there was one or two doctrinal or moral points they had to resolve before making a Profession of Faith, at least an honest one. Many tell of a stumbling block, be it a Marian dogma, Papal infallibility or the Church's teaching on contraception, abortion, homosexuality, women's ordination, etc. Finally, they either see the light or are willing to abandon themselves completely and totally to God and His Holy Church and thus surrender their personal authority by submitting to a higher one. Too many 'half-baked' Catholics around today who only accepted some but not all the official teachings and laws of the Church. Too many who were not taught the correct or at least the complete deposit of faith during their period of catechesis and intruction. Best to have someone wait until he or she is ready to give their entire assent of faith and their complete submission of mind and will to the Pope and Magisterium. Anything less is cheating God, is cheating the Church and is cheating the person him/herself.

I would like to give him the benefit of the doubt and hope that Tony Blair truly came into full communion with Rome, liturgically, theologically and morally. I hope his Profession of Faith was sincere and complete. And despite his faults, mistakes and sins of the past, new converts are asked to make a good first confession before they are Confirmed and receive Holy Communion. Let us trust that is what happened and rejoice that this Christmas, Tony Blair and family can attend Mignight Mass together and receive the Sacraments as one family within the great family of faith we call the Catholic Church.

Return to Ritual

The Cafeteria is Closed posted this today. You won't see such articles in most diocesan newspapers, yet ironically, in a secular periodical like U.S. News & World Report we get a glimpse into a profound truth on sacred worship.


Indeed, the NEED for ritual transcends religion. Human nature is oriented toward ritual since it reminds us that we are hylomorphic beings (body & soul; material & spiritual; matter & form; for those who slept through Aristotelian Philosophy 101)

Ritual is the prescribed set of symbolic actions, clothing, artifacts, gestures and words which are done consistently and intentionally. By using symbols, man, who is physically confined to space and time, is nevertheless able to transcend the spatial-temporal limits and thus connect the past, present and future.

Even people who may have a personal dislike or disdain for routine in general still have an inner longing and need for ritual at some level since it brings stability and security in a world that is perennially changing, moment by moment. Technology, medicine and science progress day by day but man still needs to anchor himself to the past so he can weather the turbulence of the present and the uncertainty of the future. Customs and traditions are part of every family and even individuals have some things they do consistently the same way, not just out of habit, but because doing it methodically and identically each time gives a sense of security: it works.

One of the by-products of liturgical abuses in the post-Vatican II era is the demasculinization of worship. The Greeks saw the importance of ritual in their sporting games, notably the Olympiad. These symbolic actions connected the participants of the present with the heroes of the past. There was unity among diversity in that numerous contestants with different abilities were playing the same games and by the same rules. Likewise, the Romans saw the importance of ritual in their historic Imperial Army. Military life is based on rituals. It unites members of the group into an organic unit. Ritual gives stability, it unites and it strengthens.

When radicals began to abandon rubrics in the Mass, they in essence diluted ritual to virtual oblivion. Man still needs ritual in the 21st century as he did in the first or second century, the middle ages or even in ante-diluvian times. Look at the popularity of sporting events. Rules are followed, uniforms worn, referees and umpires officiate. Join the Knights of Columbus, the Elks, Moose Lodge or even the Loyal Order of Waterbuffalos and you will see ritual, not just in the initiation of new members but at important events and occasions.

Then comes along the new priest to the parish who decides on his own not to wear the prescribed vestments for Mass. He disregards the rubrics of the Missal and ad-libs the prayers to make himself relevant. The discontinuity drove many men from church. When ancient rituals are casually and carelessly abandoned, ignored or ridiculed, guys stop coming.

Several dioceses have recently learned that lesson and have instituted a formal set of concelebration chasubles whenever the priests gather together for a Mass with the Bishop, e.g., ordination of deacons or priests, Chrism Mass or the funeral of a cleric. Previously, the custom had been for concelebrants to wear an alb and their own stole while the principal celebrant alone wore a chasuble. This is where you would find all kinds of political, philosophical and theological nonsense. Some priests had slogans on their stoles, others had bizarre graphics, others had colors which had no connection to the liturgical use of only white, gold, red, green, violet or black. Shades of blue, yellow, orange, brown, etc. punctuated the sea of stoles at an ordination.

Now, we all look alike in that we are all wearing albs, stoles and chasubles. Not just matching vestments but proper ones as well. Each one of us was ordained an alter Christus to act in persona Christi. Hence, the individual no longer matters. As Saint Paul says, "it is no longer I, but Christ living in me."

The recent changes in papal vestments thanks to the new Master of Ceremonies, Msgr. Guido Marini, will have a great impact on liturgical celebrations around the globe. Attention and respect to tradition but most of all to authentic ritual enhances worship and unifies and unites those who participate.

At diocesan and parish levels, even more so, the need and urgency to return to proper ritual is critical. One does not have to resort to the extreme of being Pharisaically ritualistic, either. Proper attention, respect and deliberate execution of authentic ritual demonstrates a love for God and His Church. Doing even little things well and out of love, shows our love, said the Little Flower. Clean linens, unwrinkled vestments, polished vessels, and reverent celebration of the sacraments as delineated in the ritual books, especially the careful observance of saying the right words and performing the right gestures and actions show how much we love God. Inattention to these things shows more a love of self.

Hat's Off

JUST FOR THE FUN OF IT

Fraternity of Saint Peter sends first missionary into outer space

Let's Do the Time Warp Again --- NOT

Paul Nichols's Catholic Cartoon Blog had me in stitches and he's back after a brief haitus. You can see some of his work on this blog in the far right (what else) column

www.catholiccartoonblog.blogspot.com/


Ironically, the radicals of the 1960's are today and tomorrow's pensioners who spend their retirement golfing and shopping in Florida during the winter months. Those who sat-in with dissidents like Charlie Curran et al., can now barely stand without a walker. Kumbaya has been replaced by Kyrie Eleison. "Long Live the Revolution" has been replaced with "Long Live the Reform of the Reform."


Here's real irony: the youth who wanted 'Folk Masses' in the '60's are now the cranky old codgers having nightmares about today's youth who want the Latin Mass (whether ordinary or extraordinary forms), just like their great-grandparents before them.

VIVA IL PAPA BENEDETTO

What Hollywood Will NEVER Produce

Coming in 2008 from ICONOCLAST Pictures, Inc.

The Copper Dredil

Long ago, in a place far away from political correctness, there was a land, a prophecy, a villian and a hero. Critics rave about the upcoming film for its bold, daring and provocative attempt to insult two of the three major monotheistic religions.

Since Christianity, and Catholicism in particular, have already been dissed, trashed and ridiculed by Hollywood seventy times seventy times, the tables have now been turned. Ron Boward produces and directs this innovative cinematic masterpiece intended to even the score once and for all.

Synopsis – an ancient prophecy predicts that the thousand year reign of evil tyranny will end only when the magic Copper Dredil is returned to its proper place. Before that can happen, however, it must be rescued from the clutches of the malevolent Synagogue of Zeon, a super-secret society of fanatical fundamentalists who claim the only true magic comes from the Book of Spells. They are always at war, however, with a competing faction, the Mosque of Mira whose adherents reject anything and everything in the Book of Spells. They maintain the only true and valid incantations are the ones not written down but are spontaneously created by the individual wizard. The Mosque of Mira has declared a Jihad on the Synagogue of Zeon. There can be no victory until one side is no more.

Meanwhile, while the forces of darkness battle each other for control of the world, a small group of rebels known as the Sacerdotes, led by the wise and aged Pontifex Maximus, seek to fulfill the prophecy given millennia ago. Visitors from another world came in peace to share their knowledge: scientific, philosophic and theological. They only wore scarlet red clothing and were called by the natives, “Cardinals.” The Cardinals had no agenda and no ulterior motives. That was not the case with their enemies, however.

Cardinals insisted on worshipping their deity facing East and in an old, archaic language only spoken in their temples. They also wear elaborate costumes when they worship.

The biggest obstacle, however is that the Cardinals refuse to dilute their teaching which is as much moral as it is religious. An alliance between the Cantors (local authorites from the Synagogue) and the Imams (secret police from the Mosque) occurs when it is learned that the Cardinals have something which promises eternal life.

Before the mysterious element is discovered, however, war breaks out and all the Cardinals are killed, save one. Catzinger lives long enough to prophesize that a hero will find the Copper Dredil which has the power to render enemies powerless and thus enable the quest for the Missal, the special book that allows the Priest to make present the source of eternal life.

Until that day arrives, the mysterious artifact lays hidden and protected in a Basilica by an order of Knights called the Krewsaydurs. Hildebrand, our hero, leaves the safety of the monastery to seek the Copper Dredil and free his people from slavery once and for all. He is accompanied by Zozimus, the sacristan; Jerome, the lector; Edmund, the extern; and Sylvester, the Acolyte. Together, they form a brotherhood sworn to return proper worship back to their temple. Forbdidden for centuries, the ancient language of their forefathers is still secretly used by our champions. VERITAS VINCIT (truth conquers) is the motto of this coalition for victory.


But it is only fiction, so why should anyone be offended??? Hear that before?

Of course, you'll NEVER see such a film EVER attacking or even making satire of Judaism or Islam. Yet, Christianity is perpetually being parodied and in fact persecuted by mainstream Hollywood. Catholic Christianity is the usual target, as evidenced in THE GOLDEN COMPASS where the enemy is the Magisterium (a term unique to Catholicism) and punctuated with villians who are 'priests.' Why not renegade rabbis or imams? Because that would rightly offend Jews and Muslims who would not tolerate it. They resist blasphemy while our people ignore it. Hollywood should either attack ALL religions (not a good choice) or NO religions (best option).