Saint Pio of Pietrelcina

Today is the feast of Saint Pio of Pietrelcina, still affectionately known as "Saint Padre Pio." Blessed with the stigmata, this holy man of God entered religious life (Capuchin Franciscans). EWTN has a magnificent biography on their webstite (click picture above). He entered novitiate at the age of 15 after his father went to America to earn money for his son's education prior to entering the friary. Though he battled disease and attacks of the Devil, his worst suffering occured when he was FALSELY accused. Some of his own brethren and some of the hierarchy were envious of his spiritual goodness and when it was known he had the stigmata, slander and calumny were used to discredit him. It went as far up as the Holy Office. In 1923, the msot vile and reprehensible lie was proliferated and he was forbidden to teach teenage boys in the school attached to the monastery because he was considered "a noxious Socrates, capable of perverting the fragile lives and souls of boys." Nothing was further from the truth but his enemies were persuasive and relentless. Despite his innocence, he obediently complied with his unjust punishment. Guilty of no wrongdoing, he suffered greatly as he was no longer allowed to publicly celebrate Mass, preach or hear confessions. This almost broke his heart. Today, there are other innocent priests who suffer likewise by being suspended of their faculties based on false accusations. The disgusting and repugnant behavior of a few and their subsequent cover-up by some bishops have produced a climate of quasi-paranoia so that some innocent clergy are becoming collateral damage victims.

Padre Pio was allowed to celebrate public Mass in 1933 by order of Pope Pius XI who said "I have not been badly disposed toward Padre Pio, but I have been badly informed." Pope Pius XII encouraged people to visit him. Pope John XXIII remained suspicious but Pope Paul VI dismissed all charges and exonerated the holy man. Pope John Paul the Great beatified (1999) and then canonized (2002) Padre Pio. He endured poverty, disease, hardship, two World Wars, but the most painful was the excruciating suffering of being falsely accused. The vicious lies told about him would have caused the paper they were written upon to burst into flames. Fortunately, he was cleared (sadly, this cannot be said of all falsely accused priests today).Those real culprits who commit the abominable crime of abusing children should have the most severe punishment. They should be defrocked and excommunicated for ruining a child's life and for the scandal they brought upon the Church. Yet, we cannot forget there are always some innocent victims on the other side of the fence insofar as the falsely accused can belong. Just as no one would want to punish a mother for child abuse who was in reality innocent of the accusations, so, too, must we remember the axiom 'innocent until proven guilty.' The gravity of the crime of child abuse demands that ANY and ALL perpetrators be severely punished (be it clergy of any religion, or be it coaches, teachers, scout-masters, neighbors, relatives or even parents) but it also requires diligence to insure that no innocent (falsely accused) are sacrificed in the process. What was vile then is vile now. Child abuse is abhorrent and so is the abuse of power when those in authority cover-up for abusers and/or when they misuse their authority and unjustly censure those priests (or deacons or seminarians) who merely disagree with them or who oppose their prudential judgment. Ironically, some will suspend priests for following the rubrics or for remaining faithful to the Magisterium merely because they criticize their superiors on non-doctrinal matters. Question a policy or prudential judgment and get censured while real violators of canon law and liturgical rubric get promotions and honors. Padre Pio gives us the best remedy: BEAR WRONGS PATIENTLY. I pray to him DAILY for myself and for ALL my brother priests and deacons, especially the most forgotten and most foresaken, the falsely accused and innocent clergy wherever they may be.

Saint Pio of Pietrelcina, pray for us

Monsignori

  


Papal Honors

The Holy Father can bestow one of three levels of honor to any priest in the Catholic Church: protonotaries apostolic, honorary prelates (domestic prelate), and chaplains of His Holiness (papal chamberlain).  Contrary to common belief, Monsignors (the title given to anyone holding one of the three aforementioned honors) have no more juridical authority than any other priest and he is paid the same as any other priest, too.  Parochial Vicars (formerly known as Curates or Assistant Pastors) are paid a little less than their immediate superior, the parish Pastor.  Normally, though, a Pastor or a priest working in the Chancery Office, is made a Monsignor to honor the work he has done over the years for the diocese.  The authority and the pay grade of any cleric is based on his assignment from the bishop.  Being a Monsignor is purely ceremonial and one of honor not one of legal or sacramental effect.  At the same time, however, the naming of Monsignors is one poignant way the local bishop has to identify and honor some of his own clergy.

It is not a popularity contest since no one votes for nor is one a candidate for Monsignorship.  Only the bishop submits names to the Holy See and it is up to the Roman Pontiff to decide who is given the 'sacred purple' as they say.  No priest aspires to be a Monsignor but I have never found one verified case of a priest who actually refused the honor.  Many have claimed to have rejected the title, just as some have claimed to have refused being made bishop, yet, there is never any proof of such 'humility'.  In reality, there are some political favors being given fulfilled for those loyal to the bishop in some cases and there are others who truly are role models and beacons of personal holiness.  Unfortunately, when a good, exceptional, holy and deserving priest is overlooked for such papal honors while numerous mediocre contemparies are recognized, it almost seems an act of injustice.

While not advocating a democratic or republican reform of Holy Mother Church, I do see merit in at least offering the people (parishioners and lay faithful of the diocese) and the clergy (deacons and priests) an opportunity to SUGGEST names to the local bishop for his consideration to nominate as possible Monsignors by the Pope.  No one is denying the bishop his legitimate right and prerogative to recommend or withhold any name he sees fit, however, if the general public believe they have some input, albeit consultative and not deliberative, I think it would help.  This way, the old addage might finally evaporate:  "better to not be made a Monsignor and have people ask 'why didn't that nice priest become one?' rather than be made a Monsignor and have people ask 'how the heck did he become one?'"

Father Bob Levis would NEVER ask nor want to be made a Monsignor but if there were ever a priest who DESERVED to be made one, it is he.  Ordained 60 years ago, he worked tirelessly at Gannon University teaching philosophy and theology for most of his priesthood AND helping our in nearby parishes.  He was the founding Director of the Pontifical Center for Catechetical Studies; President Emeritus and co-founder of the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy; author of "Jesus, The Catchism and Me; co-host of weekly TV series on EWTN, "Web of Faith."  An advocate and supporter of Catholic home-schooling, Father Levis tours the country giving talks, lectures, retreats and missions, etc.  Active as ever, even though compelled to retire from being a college professor at age 70, he has been working just as hard these last 16 years as he did for the first seven decades.  His orthodoxy, piety, wisdom, and pastoral compassion are legendary.  He has done enormous good for his alma mater, his diocese, his bishop, his parishes, his students, his spiritual directees, et al. 

The Archdiocese of Saint Louis recently made 28 Monsignors and the Diocese of Allentown made 18 Monsignors this past February.  This seems to dispel the unwritten legend that there is some magic formula (only 10% of the diocesan presbyterate can be made Monsignors) determining how many priests the local bishop can propose to Rome for papal honors.  Some say since you cannot honor everyone, then honor no one.  Phooey!  I have nothing but respect and admiration for my older colleagues who gave their entire lives to the Church and endured more hardship and made more sacrifices than I did or ever will make.  We need some mechanism to honor the exceptional men of the Church who have lived holy lives of distinction.  Their example encourages the rest of us.  No, we middle-aged and younger clergy are not dreaming of becoming Monsignors someday, rather, we want to imitate the dedication and integrity of our beloved elder brothers while at the same time showing respect and honor to them.  Of course not everyone can be honored, for it then lessens the particular honor itself.  Yet, to say no one should be recognized is a form of negative socialism, I think.  Others, cynically claim the papal honors are abused by some bishops who use it merely to reward cronies and the good old boys who function as 'yes' men rather than the faithful, loyal men in the trenches, who really live by the rules.  Hopefully, these are the minority in any event.

There will never be Monsignor ballots in the bulletins and thankfully no priests 'running for the office' as some sort of candidate, either.  Nevertheless, every now and then God blesses the church and a particular diocese with exceptional men, like Father Levis, who deserve and SHOULD be made a Monsignor in gratitude for his enormous labors of love.  That's just my opinion, however, and I am unanimous in it.

Sacerdotal Heraldry

             

---

Father Guy Selvester is an international expert on ecclesiastical heraldry.  He recently wrote an outstanding article on his blog Shouts in the Piazza on the issue of priests having their own coat of arms.  Rather than being a sign of pretentiousness or vanity, ecclesiastical heraldry is about tradition and honor.

During Mediaeval times, the clergy and nobility (first and second estates, respectively), used heraldry to tell a story about the person, their background, their origins, etc.  The heraldic shield came from the actual shield knights used to protect themselves while wearing armor and engaged in battle.  Ecclesiastical heraldry is as old as that of nobility and monarchy.  Steeped in tradition, today's coat of arms, especially in ecclesiastical usage, connects the past with the present.  Family symbols are used when possible and creatures and things which represent places, ideas, values, and deeds. 

Most people know that Bishops, Archbishops, Cardinals and Popes have their own unique coat of arms but what most people do not know is that priests (and deacons) as members of the clergy are equally entitled to their own as well.  The only difference is that everyone who enjoys the fullness of Holy Orders (episcopacy) has a diocese or titular see under their jurisdiction, hence, half of their coat of arms is that of the particular place with the other half being their own or familial shield.  The personal side is usually designed for the cleric when he is ordained or consecrated bishop. 

Deacons have a black hat (galero) with no cords or tassles whereas a Priest has the same black galero but with two cords (one on each side) with one tassle each.  Vicars Forain (Deans) and Episcopal Vicars have a black galero and two cords but with two tassles on each side.  Monsignors have the following: Chaplains of His Holiness, black galero with six tassles on each side; Prelates of Honor, purple galero with six tassles on each side; Protonotary Apostolic has purple galero with six red tassles on each side.  Bishops have green galeros with six tassles on each side; Archbishops have green galeros with ten tassles on each side.  Cardinals have a red galero with fifteen tassles on each side.  Popes have the Papal Tiara.

Mater Dolorosa

Seven Sorrows of the Virgin Mary

1. The Prophecy of Simeon over the Infant Jesus.(Luke 2:34)
2. The Flight into Egypt of the Holy Family. (Matthew 2:13)
3. The Loss of the Child Jesus for Three Days. (Luke 2:43)
4. The Meeting of Jesus and Mary along the Way of the Cross. (Luke 23:26)
5. The Crucifixion where Mary stands at the foot of the cross. (John 19:25)
6. The Descent from the Cross where Mary receives the dead body of Jesus in her arms. (Matthew 27:57)
7. The Burial of Jesus. (John 19:40)

requiescat in pacem

September 11th, 2001

a day of infamy

As we mark the seventh anniversary of 9-11, it behooves us as Catholic Americans to remember and to practice our faith. Justice without mercy is un-Christian; mercy without justice is irresponsible. We must pray and work for justice tempered by mercy. Justice demands that we protect and defend ourselves and the defenseless. Justice also demands we capture, incarcerate and punish the guilty for their violent attack on the innocent. Mercy demands we pray for our enemies and love those who hate us. The Gospel challenges us to pray for the conversion of sinners and evildoers. Are these not spiritual works of mercy: to admonish the sinner, to forgive injuries, to comfort the mourning, to counsel the doubtful, to instruct the ignorant, to pray for the living and the dead and to bear wrongs patiently? Yet, mercy does not negate nor contradict justice. Good is to be encouraged and rewarded while evil is to be condemned and punished. That is for the common good of everyone. As Catholc Christians, we can and must pray for our worst enemies, the terrorists. That does not mean that no one is to hunt them down and bring them to justice. It means we pray for their spiritual conversion that they repent of their former evil and pledge to live good and holy lives in the present and the future.


The innocent victims from the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and the crashed plane in Shanksville, PA, deserve justice as do their surviving families. The brave men and women who rushed in to save people and who died in the process merit our prayers, thanks and respect. The brave members of our military who died in battle in Afghanistan and Iraq deserve our prayers and gratitude as well. Too many innocent people have died at the hands of a few, radical terrorists who pervert religion for their own political tyranny. Anytime evil is done, the guilty need to be identified, found, and punished. As Christians we are not asked nor required to give evil a blank check. Our faith does not even suggest we give carte blanche to al Qaeda or Osama bin Laden. It does ask us to PRAY for these wicked men. Pray for justice and pray for mercy. Mercy in that they repent and stop doing evil and that we protect more innnocent lives.


I remember the nuns telling us in parochial school to pray for the conversion of Russia. We prayed every day one Hail Mary, Our Father and Glory Be for the Communists in the USSR and on mainland China to convert from atheism and to embrace Christianity. We also prayed for our brave men and women who defend and protect us in the military. There was no contradiction then and there is none now. People have distorted mercy into a pathetic pity party where the criminal is given more rights and respect than the victims. They have perverted mercy into a wishy-washy, naive and irresponsible delusion that society does not need penal sanctions to preserve order or protect the common good. Contrition and confession are never enough. There must be firm purpose of amendment and some form of penance.


Others have distilled and reduced justice into a primiaeval lex talionis (quid pro quo) and remove any vestige of humanity, mercy or possibility of repentence and reform. This cold blooded form of justice is not Christian nor is it human. Justice and mercy need to coexist. God practices both and so must man. A Christian nation would still have police and prisons, courts and trials, etc. What our faith adds to society and culture, however, is PERSPECTIVE. We are commanded by God to BALANCE justice and mercy without sacrificing one for the other. This is why denying Holy Communion to unrepentant pro-abortion politicians is not a violation of mercy. It is just in that they are openly defying Church doctrine on the sanctity of human life from the moment of conception and on the immorality of abortion at any stage. It is also mercy in that as an EXPIATORY sanction it seeks a REMEDIAL outcome, i.e., the change of heart of the politician to turn back to being pro-life. Justice demands that wrongdoing be condemned and punished but mercy demands we give the guilty a chance to repent and amend their ways. Our modern culture only sees extremes on either end of the spectrum. Catholic Christianity, however, synthesizes justice and mercy together in the same moral life.


It is not easy and it takes a lot of effort but we have no choice. Peace is NOT the absence of war. It is the tranquility of order, Saint Thomas Aquinas said. Order is the correct relationship between parts. When there is harmony it is a consequence of everything and everyone working properly and doing their appropriate job (work). When we defend and protect innocent life, as in the case of the unborn in the womb or the terminally ill in the hospitals and nursing homes, we are doing the right thing for the right reason. When people kill innocent human life, they disrupt the harmony God intended. When we allow terrorists to spread their hatred, lies and oppression, we are neglecting our duty to defend and protect as well. Loving our enemies and praying for our persecutors (that they repent and amend their lives) is a command from God, not an option. Love does not mean being blind or deaf to evil being committed, it means doing what we can to stop evil, for the sake of the victim and the criminal, both of whom are children of God.

Logic 101

Senator Joe Biden should get his money back from his alma mater since they evidently did not teach him real and true philosophy. His argument on Meet the Press was a complete fallacy. Truth is the correspondence of our intellect and reality.

Empirical truth is the proper object of science which employs observation and experimentation.
Rational truth is the proper object of philosophy known by using human reason.
Theological truth is the proper object of religion and is rooted in divine revelation known by faith.

While theologians from different denominations and religions can argue and debate on the immortality of the soul, objectively speaking, the Natural Moral Law is known by REASON and not by faith. Hence, the intrinsic evil of a moral act can and is known by any human person since it is self-evident. While it is true that the Bible and the Magisterium condemn certain acts as sinful, even an atheist or agnostic cannot dispute the innate wickedness of moral evils like murder, rape, genocide, etc.

Senator Biden erroneously claims that only faith informs us about the sacrosanct nature of the human soul from the moment of conception. If it were only known by faith (like the dogma of the Trinity or the Incarnation), then of course, this cannot be imposed on all citizens since not everyone espouses the same religion. On the other hand, as the post WWII war crimes trial in Nuremberg proved, most moral truths are known by reason alone even when reaffirmed and reiterated by divine revelation. Hence, no Nazi soldier or general could claim exemption to incurring moral guilt whenever they engaged in outright mass murder vis-a-vis the Holocaust. Ethical behavior for human beings is based on the law written in the heart and knowable by reason. St. Paul admits this in his own epistle (Romans 2:14). The pagan (pre-Christian Roman) philosopher Cicero stated in his De Republica:

There is truly a law which is right reason, fitted to our nature, proclaimed to all men, constant, everlasting. It calls to duty by commanding and deters from wrong by forbidding ... It can neither be evaded nor amended nor wholly abolished. No decree of the Senate or people can free us from it. No explainer nor interpreter of it need be sought but itself. There will not be found one law at Rome and another in Athens, one now and another later, rather one law, everlasting and unchangeable, extending to all nations and all times, with one common teacher and ruler of all.

Abortion has been consistently condemned since the Apostolic era (cf. the Didache, circa 50 AD) and formally defined in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992) in #2271. Yet, Senator Biden claims that protecting the lives of unborn human babies is an imposition of religious beliefs on others who may not share our religious tenets. If morality were ONLY know via faith and revelation, then he would be right. HOWEVER, Nuremberg proved that morality is also if not primarily known via the natural law and by the use of reason. Otherwise, how could anyone enact civil laws forbidding slavery, segregation, apartheid, genocide, etc.? Is slavery a moral evil ONLY because Christianity says so? The Supreme Court at one time legalized slavery (Dred Scott decision in 1857) and explicitly stated that African-American slaves were not and could never become U.S. citizens. The majority opinion said that laws which freed slaves violated the Fifth Amendment since it deprived slave owners of their legal PROPERTY. It took the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments (and a Civil War) to defend the inalienable rights of black persons.

Biden and Pelosi and others maintain that another Supreme Court decision has precedence, Roe v. Wade. Biden goes so far as to say anti-abortion laws or amendments would violate the 'privacy' clause of the Fourth Amendment. See any similarity between Roe v. Wade and Dred Scott v. John Sanford? Both claimed to have jurisdiction over human persons (the former over black Americans, the latter over unborn Americans). Both denied the inalienable rights of certain human beings.

Slavery had been legal and is now considered un-Constitutional. Abortion is now legal and must also be declared un-Constitutional. The same Natural Moral Law and the same human reason which every sane human person possesses knows that it is wrong, it is immoral and it is evil to treat a whole race or a whole class of people as less than human. Whether black or white, born or unborn, believer or atheist, liberal or conservative, democrat, liberal or independent, all human beings have human rights, and the first and foremost is the right to life.

Fascism is a political philosophy that refuses to recognize the dignity and sanctity of the person and which glorifies the State. It is not fascism to end slavery, segregation, apartheid or abortion, even if there are some citizens who erroneously believe these are legitimate enterprises. Fascism is when the government forces doctors, nurses and health care personnel to provide facilities and procedures for abortion even when those medical people have conscientious objections.

His clan is being fascist when they force an immoral activity to be treated as a legally protected activity. No one is imposing religious doctrines when they condemn the evil of abortion anymore than one could accuse Martin Luther King, Jr., of being doctrinairre when he called for an end to racism and segregation. While he had spiritual reasons and motives, he also had moral and ethical ones rooted in REASON which no human being could refute. Likewise, Biden, Pelosi, Kerry, Kennedy, Giuliani, and Ridge (et al.) need to see that abortion has no rights, only human beings have rights. They come from our Creator and they are they are part of our nature, hence, no religion and no branch of government can ever take them away.

PRIVACY clauses are no different from PROPERTY clauses. Human beings are NOT property and their murder is not a private matter. Unborn babies are human just as are African-American, European-American, and Asian-American children and adults. Catholics who disagree are violating the Natural Law AND the Divine Law and should NOT approach nor receive Holy Communion.

ad orientem

FROM THE PASTOR:

Another aspect of our human life is the work we do in sacred worship. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is also called the Sacred Liturgy. His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI has set the stage for a renewal and renaissance of Catholic worship. This was the intention and objective of the Council Fathers at Vatican II. As mentioned before, we will be learning and using some Latin for common parts of the Mass on one weekend a month. The first Sunday (and evening before) in Marysville and the last Sunday (and evening before) in Duncannon, we will be using the Kyrie (Greek: Lord Have Mercy), Gloria (Latin: Glory to God), Sanctus (Latin: Holy, Holy), Pater Noster (Latin: Our Father), and Agnus Dei (Latin: Lamb of God). They are found in #862-869 of the large Music Issue of Today’s Missal. 'Catholic' comes from the Greek word katholikos which means 'universal' One obvious and poignant way to demonstrate the universality of our church is to use a universal language as well as our own vernacular.

If you watch the TV Mass on EWTN, you will be familiar with these. Even though only once a month, we will become more comfortable and familiar with our rich patrimony. Eastern Orthodox Americans speak fluent English yet use plenty of Greek in their weekly worship just as Jewish Americans use Hebrew in theirs. Latin is the official and traditional language of the Roman Catholic Church and coexists with the vernacular.

Once a month we will also utilize one of the options afforded the celebrant. Every priest is allowed to celebrate Mass facing the people (versus populum) or facing the Tabernacle (versus apsidem). I will do the latter once a month so you can appreciate and experience one of our beautiful customs going back to antiquity. Originally, all priests had to celebrate the Sacred Liturgy AD ORIENTEM, i.e., facing east. Churches were literally built so that the priest AND congregation both faced EAST during public worship. The reason was that the sun rose each day in the east. The Son of God rose from the dead on Easter morning, when the sun rose in the East. Hence, Christians were keen to respect that by facing east when they worshipped their Lord and Savior. Churches were built from Ancient to Mediaeval times facing east. The priest was not seen as ‘turning his back’ on the congregation, rather, BOTH priest and congregation were facing east TOGETHER. Does the bus driver or airplane pilot have his/her back toward the passengers OR rather is he/she facing the same direction of the destination everyone hopes to arrive at?

One of the dangers of exclusivlely celebrating Mass versus populum (facing the people) is that the Celebrant may be tempted to see himself as performing for the congregation. He is not on stage as an actor nor is a director or conductor guiding those in the audience. He is a LEADER of prayer and leaders POINT in the right direction. Great Generals led their armies in battle and both faced the same direction to victory. When the priest and the people both face the same direction, they are also doing the same thing, i.e., worshipping God.

The Greek and Russian Orthodox Churches, the Byzantine Catholic Churches, and many Lutheran and Anglican churches have worship services where the celebrant faces east with the congregation. Where it is geographically impossible to face east (ad orientem), the custom arose for the priest and people to face the Tabernacle (versus apsidem) since that is where the Body & Blood, Soul & Divinity of Christ was always present. Facing the Blessed Sacrament was in essence facing east since the east symbolized the Rising SON (and not just the rising SUN). Therefore, once a month, I shall celebrate Mass facing the Tabernacle, just as you do every time you sit in the pews. WE will be facing the same direction TOGETHER and not me turning my back on you as some would erroneously claim. It is only once a month but I think it important to do since it is part of our legacy, it is done all the time in the Extraordinary form of the Roman Rite (Tridentine Mass) and it is a valid and licit option in the Ordinary form (Novus Ordo or Vatican II Mass). The Scripture readings and homily will still be given facing the people since they are directed toward you. The prayers of worship directed toward God, however, will be facing Him as He IS present in the Tabernacle. Just as we have a diversity of music and language, we have a diversity of proper liturgical forms as part of our Catholic heritage. We should embrace the fullness of whom we are and how we worship.

Those Who Refuse to Learn from the Mistakes of the Past are Condemned to Relive Them

Protecting the Flock

Politicians have awoken the sleeping bear. American Bishops are adamantly correcting the inaccurate and erroneous remarks of Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and they are vigorously defending the actual teachings of the Catholic Church on when human life begins and the immorality of abortion. Let no one forget, although Nancy Pelosi and Joe Biden (John Kerry and Ted Kennedy) are democrats, Tom Ridge and Rudy Giuliani are pro-choice republicans. ALL of them fail to defend the innocent lives of unborn children killed by abortion. All claim to be Catholic and while ignoring the Magisterium's moral teachings, are often seen going to Communion.

Thankfully, Archbishop Wuerl of Washington issued this letter to his clergy: courtesy of Fr Z

PRAY

PRAY for those people who are about to be hit by Hurricane Gustav

As of this evening, a probable category 4 to hit the Gulf coast of the USA.

Texas, Louisianna, Alabama, Florida, and Mississippi targets

We may not agree on abortion, but ...

Senator Barak Obama gave an impassioned speech at the Democratic National Convention. The one line that stood out, however, was this line:

We may not agree on abortion, but surely we can agree on reducing the number of
unwanted pregnancies in this country.

At face value, many Americans, including Catholic Christians, will say, "well, its sounds reasonable and not too fanatical." Problem is that there is no middle ground with moral evil. The unjust killing of innocent human life is always grave evil. Abortion and euthanasia are always wrong, evil and immoral. Replace the word abortion with slavery or segregation. Imagine a politician saying "we may not agree on slavery" or "we may not agree on segregation (or apartheid)" BUT ... There is no BUT. Just as there can be no tolerance and no exception for child pornography, likewise, there can be no wiggle room for abortion. Innocent human life is being killed and of the most defenseless of all, the unborn within the womb.


We have some politicians who openly support abortion and profess to be Catholic. We have some religious leaders who refuse to denounce and repudiate such incompatibility. Thanks to some courageous bishops (like Archbishop Burke, Archbishop Chaput, Cardinal Rigali, Cardinal Egan, Bishop Aquila, Archbishop Wuerl, Bishop Zubik and Bishop Sheridan) who plainly reiterated and reaffirmed that politicians who openly support abortion should not go receive Holy Communion. It is sad that we cannot rejoice in having a Catholic Vice Presidential candidate since he staunchly defends Roe v. Wade. He should be defending unborn life instead. He admits that he believes life begins at conception, yet Senator Biden feels compelled to support some arcane notion of 'privacy rights' which is a euphemism for abortion.


It would have been nice when Senator John Kerry ran for office to be proud that we had a Catholic Presidential candidate back in 2004. Sadly, he, too, was pro-choice and not pro-life. Maybe we will see in the near future a devout Catholic candidate for Vice President and President where he or she is also openly PRO-LIFE. I suspect before that happens, however, we will need to convince those Governors, Senators and Congressmen (and Congresswomen) who profess to be a Catholic Christian that their faith is compatible with the Constitution when it defends LIFE rather than making a 'choice'. It is no accident that the Founding Fathers put the word first as our inalienable rights ... "LIFE, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." Unfortunately, our culture is too influenced by secular humanism and therefore it distorts this notion by perverting and isolating two of the three God given rights. Liberty is perverted into sheer license, i.e., doing whatever I choose. Happiness is distorted into mere pleasure and comfort. Yet, LIFE precedes the other two. The right to life is combined with the right to use my free will and DO WHAT I OUGHT TO DO and that will lead to me finding true HAPPINESS and JOY which transcend pleasure and comfort.

Papist Points to Pertinent Picture

American Papist had this link on his blog from the classic movie, Becket, with Richard Burton and Peter O'Toole


(no connections to any living politicians are inferred or implied)

Becket

Bad and Badder (or Dumb and Dumber)

Exhibit A: Catholic candidate who openly admits that human life begins at conception AND openly defends the so-called 'privacy rights' of Roe v. Wade to keep abortion legal and available and thus allows for the unjust killing of innocent unborn lives.

Exhibit B: Catholic politician who erroneously believes and espouses that the Catholic Church's condemnation of abortion is recent (within 50 yrs.) and bases that on a misinterpretation of scholastic philosopher's use of Aristotelian biology that wrongly asserted the premise that human beings first begin as vegetative souls, then animal and finally human while in the womb.

Who is more culpable? Both are wrong in their defense of legalized abortion. Both are presumed honest in their disclosure of what they believe. Only the Good Lord knows with metaphysical certitude if the ignorance is invincible, however, the more dangerous position is the acceptance of an acknowledged moral evil (direct killing of innocent unborn human life).

Humanae Vitae was written forty years ago (1948) and the Catechism of the Catholic Church in 1992 and Evangelium Vitae 1995. Yet, as the CCC states in #2271

Since the first century the Church has affirmed the moral evil of every procured abortion. This teaching has not changed and remains unchangeable. Direct abortion, that is to say, abortion willed either as an end or a means, is gravely contrary to the moral law

The Didache goes back more than fifty years (more like two THOUSAND years), so Exhibit B's argument is false and specious. Worse, though, is Exhibit A's formal cooperation (as well as material) in evil.

How About This Catholic Candidate for VP?

McCain - Santorum 2008 ???

a much better Pro-Life voting record than Joe Biden's

Democratic VP Nominee and His Catholicism

Senator Joseph Biden (D) of Deleware, was selected by Senator Barak Obama to be his running mate. It would have been nice to have someone who completely embraces the Catholic faith rather than just some of its tenets. Ironically, Senator Biden believes LIFE BEGINS AT CONCEPTION but he also defends Roe v. Wade and does not want to outlaw abortion. He does oppose partial-birth abortion but does not support a ban on cloning. IF he is elected Vice President, he would still be ineligible for Holy Communion based on his stands. Deacons, Priests and Bishops would be compelled to refuse him Communion as urged by Archbishop Burke (for any Catholic politician who notoriously supports abortion). The next question is what happens if the Republican VP nominee is also a pro-abortion Catholic? We can and ought to pray that ALL Catholic politicians have a change of heart and abandon their allegiance to the pro-death ideology of abortion and euthanasia. We can and ought to pray for universal consistency among all Catholics on matters of faith and morals so these situations at election time never repeat themselves.

The OnTheIssues web site list his inconsistent views thus:

• No public funding for abortion; it imposes a view. (Apr 2007)
  
• Supports partial-birth abortion ban, but not undoing Roe. (Apr 2007)
  
• Accepts Catholic church view that life begins at conception. (Apr 2007)
  
• Nominees should agree on constitutional right to privacy. (Apr 2007)
  
• Voted NO on defining unborn child as eligible for SCHIP. (Mar 2008)
  
• Voted NO on prohibiting minors crossing state lines for abortion. (Mar 2008)
  
• Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
  
• Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions. (Jul 2006)
  
• Voted YES on $100M to reduce teen pregnancy by education & contraceptives. (Mar 2005)
  
• Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
  
• Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
  
• Voted YES on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
  
• Voted NO on banning human cloning. (Feb 1998)
  
• Rated 36% by NARAL, indicating a mixed voting record on abortion. (Dec 2003)
  
• Expand embryonic stem cell research. (Jun 2004)
  
• Rated 0% by the NRLC, indicating a pro-choice stance. (Dec 2006)
  
• Ensure access to and funding for contraception. (Feb 2007)
  

Catholics who support abortion should not receive Communion, says Archbishop Burke

Rome, Aug 19, 2008 / 10:00 am (CNA).- The
prefect of the Apostolic Signature, Archbishop Raymond Burke, said this week
that Catholics, especially politicians who publically defend abortion, should
not receive Communion, and that ministers of Communion should be responsibly
charitable in denying it to them if they ask for it, “until they have reformed
their lives.”

In an interview with the magazine, Radici Christiane, Archbishop Burke
pointed out that there is often a lack of reverence at Mass when receiving
Communion. “Receiving the Body and Blood of Christ unworthily is a sacrilege,”
he warned. “If it is done deliberately in mortal sin it is a sacrilege.”

To illustrate his point, he referred to “public officials who, with knowledge
and consent, uphold actions that are against the Divine and Eternal moral law.
For example, if they support abortion, which entails the taking of innocent and
defenseless human lives. A person who commits sin in this way should be
publicly admonished in such a way as to not receive Communion until he or she
has reformed his life,” the archbishop said.

“If a person who has been admonished persists in public mortal sin and
attempts to receive Communion, the minister of the Eucharist has the obligation
to deny it to him. Why? Above all, for the salvation of that person, preventing
him from committing a sacrilege,” he added.

“We must avoid giving people the impression that one can be in a state of
mortal sin and receive the Eucharist,” the archbishop continued. “Secondly,
there could be another form of scandal, consisting of leading people to think
that the public act that this person is doing, which until now everyone believed
was a serious sin, is really not that serious - if the Church allows him or her
to receive Communion.”

“If we have a public figure who is openly and deliberately upholding abortion
rights and receiving the Eucharist, what will the average person think? He or
she could come to believe that it up to a certain point it is okay to do away
with an innocent life in the mother’s womb,” he warned.

Archbishop Burke also noted that when a bishop or a Church leader prevents an
abortion supporter from receiving Communion, “it is not with the intention of
interfering in public life but rather in the spiritual state of the politician
or public official who, if Catholic, should follow the divine law in the public
sphere as well.”

“Therefore, it is simply ridiculous and wrong to try to silence a pastor,
accusing him of interfering in politics so that he cannot do good to the soul of
a member of his flock,” he stated.

It is “simply wrong” to think that the faith must be reduced to the private
sphere and eliminated from public life, Archbishop Burke said, encouraging
Catholics “to bear witness to our faith not only in private in our homes but
also in our public lives with others in order to bear strong witness to
Christ.”

The Confraternity of Catholic Clergy unequivocally supports His Grace in this unambiguous response to those Catholics who support abortion and still approach the Sacred and Most Holy Eucharist. We are proud to have been called the "Burke Brigade" last year in the secular press when we visited the Archdiocese of St. Louis. God save and bless Archbishop Burke.

Sacred Name of the Almighty to Remain Unspoken

YHVH

A new Vatican instruction reminds liturgists and songwriters that the sacred Hebrew name of God is to remain unspoken. Hymns (from the '70's and '80's which peppered verses with the word YAHWEH) must remove the unutterable proper name (transliterated = YHVH; translated = I AM WHO AM) and replace with Lord (Adonai, Kyrios or Dominus) and/or God (Elohim, Theos, Deus) for all hymns.

Since the time of Moses when God revealed His sacred name, only the High Priest could whisper this most sacred word while he stood before the Ark of the Covenant in the Holy of Holies of the Temple on one day each year (Day of Atonement, i.e., Yom Kippur). Ancient Hebrew had no vowels, only consonants, so some Jews purposely used other vowels to form the word JEHOVAH whereas other Jews merely replaced the sacred name (sometimes called the TETRAGRAMMATON which is Greek for 'four letters') The actual four Hebrew consonants are transliterated as (Y or J)odh, (H)e, (V or W)aw and (H)e, remembering that Hebrew is written from right to left unlike Greek, Latin and European languages which are written from left to right.

Hence, hymns like YAHWEH I know You are near must either be changed to say LORD or GOD I know You are here or simply deleted.

This is more than just a politically correct move to respect our Jewish brethren. It is also in conformity to what the Church has done for millennia before our English vernacular began to assert itself as the dominant tongue for contemporary worship in the USA. The letter from Cardinal Arinze's office to the USCCB reads:



"As an expression of the infinite greatness and majesty of God, it was held to be unpronounceable and hence was replaced during the reading of sacred Scripture by means of the use of an alternate name: 'Adonai,' which means 'Lord,'" the Vatican letter said. Similarly, Greek translations of the Bible used the word "Kyrios" and Latin scholars translated it to "Dominus"; both also mean Lord.

"Avoiding pronouncing the Tetragrammaton of the name of God on the part of the church has therefore its own grounds," the letter said. "Apart from a motive of a purely philological order, there is also that of remaining faithful to the Church's tradition, from the beginning, that the sacred Tetragrammaton was never pronounced in the Christian context nor translated into any of the languages into which the Bible was translated."

Happy Feast Day to my favorite Poor Clare Nun

Happy Feast of Saint Dominic

Founder of the Order of Preachers

Singing Nun - Dominique - 45 rpm

Singing Nun - Dominique - 45 rpm

Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn (1918-2008)

REST IN PEACE

Alexandr Solzhenitsyn was one of my heroes in minor and major seminary (1976-1988). His epic Gulag Archipelago mirrored the conditions in many seminaries across the country at that time. The eerie parallel was obvious to anyone who had ears to hear or eyes to see. The Soviet Union had an elaborate system to identify, discredit, disgrace and isolate political dissenters. Anyone who dared defy the Communist Party was considered a traitor regardless of their patriotism toward Mother Russia. Communism was the only valid means of showing one's love for country and disloyalty to the party was seen as a threat to national security.

Likewise, anyone who did not embrace theological dissent (ala Charlie Curran, Richard McBrien, Sr. Joan Chittister, OSB, et al), who did not engage in illicit liturgical innovation or who did not publicly disdain Cardinal Ratzinger was considered a 'problem'

Solzhenitsyn described how psychiatrists were on the Communist party payroll so they could crank out predetermined evaluations. Anyone not 100% loyal to the party could easily be diagnosed as having psychopathic anomalies which required isolation and extensive psychotherapy. Political dissenters and religious leaders who dared expose the nakedness of the state would be labeled as mentally incompetent. Ironically, anyone who dared defend the Magisterium and/or the Roman Pontiff were similarly diagnosed as 'rigid', the infamous code word liberals use to disavow their 'right-wing, conservative traditionalist' colleagues and classmates.

He told how the enemy used informants to spy on the prisoners in the Gulag. Words were twisted and taken out of context so that an ironclad case could be brought against the troublemakers. We, too, experienced certain seminarians who were faculty favorites and who listened at closed doors and literally spied on their contemporaries just to make reports to their dark lords and masters in formation. Since most bishops would not see it as negative that a seminarian had healthy Marian devotion, the double-speak technique was used so that a poor unsuspecting candidate for Holy Orders would have a notation in his evaluation saying: POSSESSES POSSIBLE SIGNS OF OEDIPUS COMPLEX. If you were known to oppose women's ordination, your file listed you as a potential MISOGYNIST. If you were loyal and obedient to the Pope, you had a distorted perspective of authority which expresses itself in domineering PATRIARCHIALISM.

We were not exiled to Siberia but orthodox papist seminarians were socially exiled and distrusted. Faculty, peer and psychological evaluations were the weapons used to frighten, intimidate and coerce 'dissidents' to stop quoting Denziger's Enchiridion Symbolorum or Aquinas' Summa Theologica. These were the pre-Catechism days, so only the SPIRIT OF VATICAN II could be invoked, never the actual LETTER as found in the authentic documents of the Council. Theologians and liturgists who pooh-poohed anything prior to 1965 claimed an equal dual Magisterium to the Pope and Bishops, namely, themselves. Situation ethics, probabilisim, consequentialism, etc., were party lines you never dare question just as in the former USSR it was forbidden to question the superiority of communism over capitalism. Christology from BELOW was national policy. Espousing dangerous ideas like the Divine Personhood of Christ or the inerrancy of Scripture or papal infallibility could get your chances of being ordained as slim as Solzhenitsyn's chances of being named Secretary General of the Soviet Union.

Reading Gulag Archipelago opened my eyes to the tactics and strategies used by dissenters to either brainwash orthodox vocations or to prevent them from ever getting ordained. The truth was that some of us were considered 'too Catholic' but our files shown to the bishop and diocese said things like: rigid, argumentative, uncooperative, narrow-minded, arch-conservative, etc. Just as Colonel Hogan and his heroes found a sympathetic Sergeant Shultz to help them, we, too, found some good guys on the faculty we could trust despite their colleagues attempts to be like Major Hochstetter of the SS.

The aftermath of the clergy sex scandal, however, bodes poorly for seminarians. In the old days, if you were expelled for being 'too rigid' (meaning, you were orthodox and probably a bit traditional), you could theoretically find a sympathetic bishop and diocese to ordain you and where you would serve Holy Mother Church for your entire priesthood. Now, in the alleged premise of weeding out potential pedophiles, any seminarian who gets kicked out of seminary and/or diocese has an almost impossible chance of finding refuge. The real perverts know how to play hide and go seek, but the innocent vocation seeking to remain orthodox in a mediocre to liberal seminary might get thrown out with the rest of the trash. Collateral damage does not have to occur. Some brave bishops and seminary rectors can and have been saving potential solid candidates for the diaconate and priesthood regardless of their past track record in notoriously heterodox places. Some seminaries, like Mount Saint Mary's in Emmitsburg, MD, and others, have surpassed themselves in previous and current high caliber education, formation and faculty.

My seminary career spanned the twilight of Pope Paul VI and the vim and vigor years of Pope John Paul II. My priesthood has experienced the heavy cross of his final years and now my time as pastor has entered the era of Pope Benedict XVI. We have an excellent bishop and a terrific vocation director in our diocese of Harrisburg, PA. If this combination PLUS the access to orthodox and spiritual powerhouses that every seminary should be, there would be NO vocation crisis whatsoever and the people in the parish would be in good hands once these pious men got ordained.