Ad Orientem

Mass at the cathedral in Tulsa, Oklahoma will now be said ad orientem. His Excellency Edward Slattery explains why a priest facing East is superior to one facing the pews:

Unfortunately this change had a number of unforeseen and largely negative effects. First of all, it was a serious rupture with the Church’s ancient tradition. Secondly, it can give the appearance that the priest and the people were engaged in a conversation about God, rather than the worship of God. Thirdly, it places an inordinate importance on the personality of the celebrant by placing him on a kind of liturgical stage.

Mystified

Cardinal Mahony is making headlines again. Whenever he does, you can be sure it is another sad day for faithful Catholics worldwide.

The head of the largest archdiocese in the U.S. for the last 18 years, Mahony is being investigated by the feds for his handling of child abuse cases. Understandably, the Cardinal is "mystified and puzzled by the whole thing."

In July 2007 Cardinal Mahony managed to drain the coffers of $660,000,000 in settlement monies to avoid further testimony and proceedings in court. (Something perhaps worth remembering the next time collection plates are passed around and LA Catholics are asked to "give until it hurts" in the annual diocesan appeal.)

Anyhow, it appears Mahony will have a tougher time bribing a grand jury.

In light of the scandal this investigation will be for Catholics and non-Catholics everywhere, has there been any mention to the Holy Father of the Canon 401.2 provision?

I'm just asking...

Brick by brick

The Holy Father continues to make exceptional appointments in the Curia. On December 9th Cardinal Antonio Cañizares Llovera (in Spain, sometimes called the "Little Ratzinger") took the helm as Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments.

In an interview this last Sunday granted to Spanish daily La Razón, Cardinal Llovera had this to say:

[La Razón:] Nevertheless, Benedict XVI has reiterated in some instances the propriety of receiving communion kneeling and in the mouth. Is it something important, or is it a mere matter of form?



[Cañizares:] - No, it is not just a matter of form. What does it mean to receive communion in the mouth? What does it mean to kneel before the Most Holy Sacrament? What dies it mean to kneel during the consecration at Mass? It means adoration, it means recognizing the real presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist; it means respect and an attitude of faith of a man who prostrates before God because he knows that everything comes from Him, and we feel speechless, dumbfounded, before the wondrousness, his goodness, and his mercy. That is why it is not the same to place the hand, and to receive communion in any fashion, than doing it in a respectful way; it is not the same to receive communion kneeling or standing up, because all these signs indicate a profound meaning. What we have to grasp is that profound attitude of the man who prostrates himself before God, and that is what the Pope wants.

Awesome.

Dogs not able to bark

An article in New Jersey's The Times is aptly titled, 'U.S. bishops: Vote your conscience.' (This is a riveting news headline as the bishops are known for their incessant urging of Catholics to not vote in accord with their conscience.)

But I say the headline is befitting (most of) our American bishops because it conveys all at once the jejune, almost meaningless platitudes routinely dressed up and fed to the faithful as "spiritual guidance." As an aside, I should mention that from a purely human standpoint, I can not see how salvation is possible for those Catholics who have the misfortune of being guided by these men alone. I have hope that all will be saved; but that is only because my hope is not limited to the natural. I hope, too, that Fr. Amorth was right in his belief that ignorance is the eighth sacrament and the eighth saves more than all the others together.

But I digress. Rather than state the painfully obvious, a good shepherd would do well to instruct his faithful to inform their conscience. A Catholic who votes in accordance with his malformed conscience does his countrymen, his Church, and his God no service. And a bishop who encourages us to vote our conscience, at the same time keeping silent about how to form a Catholic conscience will have much (...many?) to answer for.

The recently appointed prefect of the Apostolic Signatura, Archbishop Raymond Burke, warned of as much during his homily on March 31 of this year for the newly ordained Bishop James Vann Johnston. He quoted St. Gregory the Great whose admonition was inspired by a reading of the prophet Isaiah and the Parable of the Good Shepherd:

"The ruler should be discreet in keeping silence and profitable in speech, lest he utter what should be kept secret, or keep secret what should be uttered. For just as incautious speech leads men into error, so, too, unseasonable silence leaves in error those who might have been instructed. Often, indeed, incautious rulers, being afraid of losing human favor, fear to speak freely of what is right, and, in the words of the truth, do not exercise the zeal of shepherds caring for the flock, but serve the role of mercenaries; for when the wolf appears, they flee and hide themselves in silence. Wherefore, the Lord reproves them through the prophet, saying: They are all dumb dogs, not able to bark."

If there was ever a time in our political history when ecclesial dogs should be barking, it is now. The Supreme Court which legalized abortion on demand for all fifty states in 1973 by a vote of 7-2 is today evenly divided on the issue (4-4) with one justice -- Kennedy -- who can't make up his mind. The average age of the four justices who favor baby-killing is 75. David Souter, the youngest of the bunch, turns 69 in September, while John Paul Stevens celebrated his 88th last April. On the pro-life side, the Chief Justice is 53, Alito is 58, Clarence Thomas is 60, and Scalia is 72.

Whoever is elected president this November will, by all estimations, have the chance to appoint at least one new Supreme Court justice and perhaps as many as three. Those to be replaced will most likely be of the pro-abortion persuasion. This means the Court has the potential to swing pro-life for the first time in 35 years, overturning the disaster that was Roe, and drastically slowing the killing (a national genocide with a body count somewhere near 47 million...and climbing).

One would think this alone would be cause for bishops everywhere to rally Catholics to the polls and turn the corner on this blemish -- one arguably worse than slavery -- in our nation's history. We have the Republican John McCain who, for all his faults, has a pro-life track record and promises to appoint justices in the mold of Alito and Roberts. And we have one Barack Obama who has made it thus far on promises of hope and change; but not with respect to abortion. With a President Obama there will be no change on the issue of abortion, there will be no hope for unwanted, unborn babies. For when it comes to killing in the womb, he's two enthusiastic thumbs up. And when it comes to a bill ensuring medical care to babies who slipped past the abortionist's knife and into this world, the most he can muster is a senate vote of 'present.' We can be sure each of his appointments to the highest court in the land (as well as our lower courts) will be staunch defenders of a woman's 'right to choose.'

It is almost as though God has set before us life and death, the blessing and the curse. One would think it enough to inspire our bishops to instruct Catholics everywhere to "Choose life, then, that you and your descendants may live, by loving the Lord, your God, heeding his voice, and holding fast to him." (Dt 30:19-20)

This, it seems, is too much to ask. From yesterday's news article:

"This is the most prickly point," said the Rev. Ronald J. Cioffi, director of the Office of Social Concerns for the Diocese of Trenton. "You may vote for a person who is pro-choice if you feel you have a moral reason to support the candidate for his stand on other issues."

Yes, this is true -- but it is only permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons. There are few things in this world proportionate to/worse than killing babies, and there are no Hitlers to vote against in 2008, so I'm having not a little trouble with Fr. Cioffi's moral theology and instruction.

Cioffi presented an outline of the U.S. Catholic Bishops' document "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship" at a meeting of about 30 staff members at the diocese's Pastoral Center yesterday.

"It's hard to find a candidate who supports all of the church's teaching," Bishop John M. Smith admitted to his staff at the meeting.

"It's a difficult time to decide how we're voting, especially this year," Smith said.

No, not such a difficult decision at all Your Excellency. Admittedly, since Senator Brownback dropped out, it has been hard to find a candidate who supports all of the Church's teaching. Perhaps the blame can go out to the bishops who failed to educate their flocks while he was still in the race. But that's water under the bridge and there are now two men left standing. For a Catholic, the choice could not be any easier.

"For those who want to be told what to do -- this document does not tell them," said Rayanne Bennett, chief communications officer for the diocese.

No doubt there were riots in New Jersey when this hit the news stands from all those Catholics who want to be told what to do.

"The reason this is important is no candidate this year and few candidates historically have perfectly lined up with Catholic social teaching," she said.

For instance, conservatives who oppose abortion often support the death penalty, Bennett said. The Catholic Church opposes both.

Wrong. Someone should hand Rayanne a copy of then-Cardinal Ratzinger's memo to the American bishops back in 2004. (Surely Bishop Smith still has his copy laying around somewhere...)

"There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia." -Cardinal Ratzinger, as Prefect of the CDF

"Catholics who vote for Republican presidential candidate John McCain because of his anti-abortion record also are voting for a candidate who supports the war in Iraq -- a war Pope Benedict XVI clearly has opposed.

"If you vote for someone who supports the war, be actively involved in trying to change his mind," Bennett said of the bishops' stand.

She really needs to read the memo. But more to the point, since we were not born yesterday and are well aware that Miss Bennett will be casting her vote for Obama in November, does that mean she will also "be actively involved in trying to change his mind" with regard to his far more problematic stance on abortion?

I'm not going to hold my breath.

Give this man a red hat!

Bishop William Murphy of Rockville Centre, NY is one of the few bishops in America willing to stand up against a culture which calls evil good and good evil.

Bishop Murphy, writing in the Long Island Catholic says, in part:

[O]ur new governor [David A. Paterson] has decided to circumvent the legislature, the courts and any testing of the will of the people. He has decided by an administrative decree that unions of persons of the same sex which are recognized as “marriage” in another state would be recognized and honored as such here in New York. This is just plain wrong.

Put aside the questionable action of a sitting governor subverting the democratic process of discussion, debate and vote. Put aside the lack of reference to the constitution of the State of New York. Put aside the lack of consultation with the State Senate and Assembly. Put aside the total circumvention of any listening to the will of the people. All these are serious deficiencies that render the governor’s action unseemly and indefensible in a democratic society. The fact is what the truth is: this is wrong and no amount of trying to appeal to “fair play” or “equality” or “putting all relationships on the same footing” can make this right.

Amen.

His Excellency has joined ranks (in my book) with fellow bishops Chaput (Denver), Burke (St. Louis), Vasa (Baker, OR), Bruskewitz (Lincoln, NE), Sheridan (Colorado Springs), Finn (Kansas City) and a select few others who are not afraid to speak the truth in love and who bend to Christ rather than popular opinion.

By way of contrast, 'disappointing and weak' would have to be my take on Cardinal Mahony's response to the recent California Supreme Court ruling.

I say, take Mahony's red had and give it to Murphy.

Alter Christus

It is difficult to imagine the full extent of public scandal caused by a priest who, speaking in the name of Christ himself, guides and instructs the flock away from Church teaching.

Saint Faustina experienced some of this betrayal felt by Our Lord.

Thursday, Nocturnal Adoration.

When I came for adoration, an inner recollection took hold of me immediately, and I saw the Lord Jesus tied to a pillar, stripped of His clothes, and the scourging began immediately. I saw four men who took it in turns at striking the Lord with scourges. My heart almost stopped at the sight of these tortures...Oh, how dreadful was Jesus' moral suffering during the scourging!

Then Jesus said to me, "Look and see the human race in its present condition." In an instant, I saw horrible things: the executioners left Jesus, and other people started scourging Him; they seized the scourges and struck the Lord mercilessly. These were priests, religious men and women, and high dignitaries of the Church, which surprised me greatly...Seeing this, my heart fell as if into a mortal agony.

Enter Fr. Michael Pfleger, Roman Catholic priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago, ardent defender of Reverend Jeremiah 'God damn America' Wright and longtime vocal (not to mention financial) supporter of pro-abortion presidential hopeful, Barack Obama.



The Rev. Wright knows he always has a home (and a place of honor) in Saint Sabrina's.

Anyone have Cardinal George's email?

More goofy clergy. Just what the Church needs.

I am not old enough to remember the embarrassments of Archbishop Hunthausen. More a political activist than apostle, His Excellency is remembered for withholding half his income tax to protest Reagan's policies at the height of the Cold War. (The IRS was in no mood for games, and simply garnished his wages.)

In a speech opposing the Trident Missile program, Hunthausen once declared, “Trident is the Auschwitz of Puget Sound.”

Mind you, the work I do here at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard is in direct support of Trident Submarines. I suppose to his mind that makes me something of a concentration camp guard.

In a rare move, the Vatican forced Hunthausen to resign some 16 years ago. Yes, he was that bad. But do not for a moment think we are today spared the foolishness of Hunthausen-esques. A thorn in the side of the Church, these prelates seem to revel in a reputation marked by an air of rebellion. I imagine them something like a spoiled teenager who never ceases to push the envelope, who never responds willingly to correction and at intervals employs good use of the silent treatment.

Take for example Bishop Cappio of Brazil. CWNews relays:

A Brazilian bishop ended a 23-day hunger strike on December 20.

A bishop fasting for 23 days? I don't know I've ever heard of that before in the history of the Church. This must be some noble cause; an end to abortion perhaps, or, or, opposition to legalized euthanasia? What could it be that drives his excellency with such conviction, such passion?

[He] had abstained from food since November 27 to dramatize his opposition to a development project

That's right. Now, if you would simply flip open your Bibles to Matthew chapter five you will find opposition to development projects significantly nearer the top of the beatitudes than you at first thought.

Bishop Cappio had lost nearly 18 pounds since beginning his fast. He was hospitalized on the same day that Brazil's top court overruled a lower court order, and said that construction could proceed on a plan to divert the flow of the Sao Francisco river.

The bishop has argued that the project will cause ecological harm, and provide disproportionate benefits to corporate farmers. The Brazilian government counters that the project will provide irrigation for millions of acres of parched land, bringing benefits to over 10 million Brazilians.

Bishop Cappio vowed to continue his fight against the project, despite ending his hunger strike. Earlier in the week he had received a message from the apostolic nuncio in Brazil, Archbishop Lorenzo Baldisseri, who was conveying the Vatican's order to end his fast. The Congregation for Bishops had sent Bishop Cappio a similar message in October 2005, when he was engaged in an earlier hunger strike against the same development project. The Brazilian bishop has never given any public response to the Vatican's orders.

Perhaps Cardinal Biffi was right when he warned the Holy Father of an Antichrist who "presents himself as a pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist."

"Today, in fact, we run the risk of having a Christianity that puts Jesus with his cross and resurrection into parentheses," Biffi said.

There are "absolute values such as the good, the true and the beautiful. One who perceives them and loves them also loves Christ, even if he does not know it, because Christ is the truth, beauty and justice."

But there are also "relative values such as solidarity, love for peace and respect for nature. If these are given an absolute value or uprooted from or placed in opposition to the proclamation of the fact of salvation, then they become the basis for idolatry and are obstacles on the path to salvation."

Bishop Cappio wasn't listening. I think he may have been too busy trying to give Rome the silent treatment.

40 years in the desert

It's been almost 40 years to the day since the close of Vatican II on December 8, 1965. And the Promised Land is now in view.

Consider:

* Cardinal Ratzinger, the then-most renowned conservative Prince of the Church has been elected to the Papacy.

* As pope he has stirred global controversy with his infamous Regensburg speech, driving home the unspoken message that Muslims will respond violently to anything, including comments on Muslim violence.

* Summorum Pontificum

* Bishop Skylstad has been replaced by Cardinal George as president of the USCCB

* And, perhaps more exciting even than the last bullet (which is a wonderful change of pace in itself), Bishop Donald Trautman's term as head of the Committee for Liturgy ends.

Trautman (or 'Trautperson' as he is affectionately called among Catholics who still believe in things like an all male priesthood), whom we have to thank for the banal, gender-neutral pablum that is our American Mass, has been replaced by Bishop Arthur Serratelli.

It's hard to envision a more dramatic change of command, as Serratelli is known to be outspoken on both life and liturgical issues, and shares in the rare distinction among his brother bishops of actually having supported Papa Benny during the 'fallout' (read: Muslim violence and MSM anti-Catholic hysteria) from Regensburg.

This, in contrast to Trautperson, who is known for his dedication in making the Gospels more apropos to pew-warming Catholics like myself. Take, for instance, his committee's rendition of Luke 13:6-7,

There once was a person who had a fig tree planted in his orchard, and when he came in search of fruit on it but found none, he said to the gardener...

It's extremely important to realize that anyone could have owned that fig tree. A man, a woman -- it doesn't really matter; and Our Lord would have used the gender neutral term "person" if he was here today. That's why he gave us the Church, and bishops like Trautperson. Well, that, and to restrict the unrestricted celebration of the Traditional Latin Mass.

Anyway. Back to Serratelli who writes:

The Liturgy of the Church is a moment where all the dimensions of our lives come before the living God. It is the place where we have an active encounter with God. It is the place, therefore, where we can rediscover the sacred in our lives.

...

Certain settings demand their own particular etiquette. Dress at a wedding reception differs from dress at a sports event. Conversation in a bar is louder than in a funeral home. The more we realize we are coming into the Presence of God in Church, the more respectful and reverent our whole person becomes. Chewing gum in Church, loud talking, beach attire and immodest dress simply do not belong!

In church, we need to cultivate a sense of God who is present to us. This is why we are called to observe moments of silence. Both before Mass begins and during Mass. Liturgy is much more than our joining together. It is our opening ourselves to God. By our singing and praying, we respond to the God who addresses us in Liturgy. A constant torrent of words and songs filling every empty space in the Liturgy does not leave the heart the space it needs to rest quietly in the Divine Presence.

In the Annunciation, after the angel announces to Mary that she is to be the Mother of the Lord and Mary gives her fiat, there is silence (cf. Lk 1:38). In this pregnant silence, that Word becomes flesh. Mary remains the model of the disciple before the Word of God. She reminds us that we need moments of silence for God to enter our life. We need those moments in our personal prayer and in the Liturgy.

...

We are not just spirit when we pray. We pray in our total reality as body and spirit. And so, to recapture the sense of the sacred, therefore, we need to express our reverence through our body language. The norms of the Liturgy wisely have us stand in prayer at certain moments, sit in attentive listening to the readings, and kneel in reverent adoration during the solemn prayer of consecration. These norms are not arbitrary nor are they left to the discretion of any individual celebrant.

...

Observing the norms of the Liturgy helps to create a profound sense of the sacred in each of us at Mass. Celebrating Mass and observing liturgical norms also makes us visibly one with the entire Church to which we belong. “Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which conform to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church” (Ecclesia de Eucharistia, 52).

Today it has become commonplace at the end of the Liturgy to recite a litany of gratitude for all those who, in some way or another, have made the celebration beautiful. No doubt there is a way to express gratitude at the end of Mass. But is it possible that each time applause breaks out in the Liturgy at the end of the Mass for someone’s contribution, we lapse into seeing the Mass as a human achievement? Sometimes even during the Mass after someone has sung a beautiful hymn, there is spontaneous applause. At such a moment, does not the real meaning of Liturgy lapse into some kind human entertainment?

The 40 years of wandering are coming to a close. Deo Gratias.

Uncle Di

Nobody says it better than Diogenes. Here's one of his latest:

if you can't be good, be careful

"Since they're going to do it anyway, they might as well do it safely."

You might not be edified by that argument, but you shouldn't be surprised. It is, essentially, the argument for the distribution of condoms to teenagers, or clean syringes to drug addicts. You can hear similar arguments made for the legalization of marijuana. And now a bishop has advanced the cause, endorsing a proposal to license brothels. He calls it the "pragmatic view," and stresses that he does not approve of prostitution. Which is reassuring.

Now let's see: If the government is licensing prostitutes, there will have to be regulations, and perhaps inspections, and certainly taxes, and... The comic potential here is enormous, but not appropriate for a family-oriented site. But I digress. My main point was the moral argument.

It's true; we're not likely to eradicate prostitution-- or drug abuse or fornication or drunkenness. "Temptations to sin are sure to come," we read in St. Luke's Gospel. It's the rest of the line-- "but woe to him by whom they come!"-- and the next verse-- 17:2-- that makes me question the "pragmatic" approach.

I'll save you the google search.

Luke 17:2, "It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, rather than that he should cause one of these little ones to stumble."

Cardinal Biffi

The Italian prelate Giacomo Biffi has just released an autobiographical book titled, Memories and Digressions of an Italian Cardinal. Biffi, now 80 years old, is known to speak his mind; and in the 640 page volume he has a few things to share.

Praise God.

If only more bishops were like him. Anyone who claims St. Ambrose as his beloved 'father and teacher' is sure to be a holy and wise man. His Eminence does not fall far from the Ambrosian Tree.

Biffi, hand-picked by His Holiness Benedict XVI to give this year's Lenten Meditations, has warned of an Antichrist who is "a pacifist, ecologist and ecumenist."

He further predicted that the Antichrist "will convoke an ecumenical council and seek the consensus of all the Christian confessions".

The "masses" would follow the Antichrist, "with the exception of small groups of Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants" who would fight to prevent the watering down and ultimate destruction of the faith.

Neither has he been shy in warning of the "invasion" of Muslim immigrants, undermining Europe's Christian values. Hard core; and precisely what the Church needs at a time when so much of the clergy has lost the faith, is lax and even indifferent to the salvation of souls.

Yes, this is the same bishop I blogged about back in February who likened women's ordination to using Coke in lieu of altar wine.

What a riot!

So now his book is hitting the book stands; only I'm afraid it isn't translated to English yet. But if you want to read a few excerpts (excerpts I found fascinating) on John XXIII, the deceptions of Vatican II, the "mea culpas" of JPII, and what he said in the most recent Conclave just click here.

H/T: Diogenes

Bishop Giovanni Han Dingxian

Here's a thought for my Catholic readers:

If you lived in the People's Republic of China, would you be a practicing Roman Catholic?

In China, you'll remember, Catholicism is outlawed. Oh sure, you can be a member of the Patriotic Church which is as much a government institution as it is a religion. And the relations between the Patriotic Church and the Vatican seem to be improving.

But my question is whether you would be a member of the Underground Church, persecuted by the state. All worship would have to be done in secret and in constant fear of being discovered. And supposing you were caught...it's anybody's guess.

To give you an idea, there's news that the Underground bishop of Yongnian, Msgr. Giovanni Han Dingxian passed away on Sunday. No one is quite sure how His Excellency died, for he died where he's spent roughly half of his life: in prison. But the curious thing is that within hours of his death (sometime around 3 A.M. or 4 A.M.), authorities had the body cremated and buried.

Unsympathetic and heartless to family and friends -- no question. But strange too.

Perhaps events of the past can help shed some light on this bizarre behavior of the Chinese government.

Ah yes, here we go:

Years before, in April ’92, there was the case of Msgr. Giuseppe Fan Xueyan, Underground bishop of Baoding, who died in prison. His body was dumped on the doorstep of his home, wrapped in a plastic bag, with signs of torture on his neck (perhaps the mark of a wire string used to choke him) and bruises on his chest and face.

Another case remembered by the Catholics is that of Msgr. Liu Difen, Underground bishop of Anguo (Hebei), who also died in ’92, after a period spent in prison. The police had warned his relatives to visit him in hospital because he was “gravely ill”. Immediately after the visit the bishop died. His body was handed back to his family and as they prepared him for burial they noticed that he had “holes in his back, the depth of a finger: a sign that he had been tortured”.

After spending 35 years of his life in prison, and being cremated within hours of his death, I think it's safe to assume Bishop Han Dingxian was a martyr who suffered a trifle more than torture by choking, bruising and drilling holes in his back.

Which brings me back to my question: If you lived in the People's Republic of China, would you be a practicing Roman Catholic?

Bishop Giovanni Han Dingxian, pray for us.

How long, O Lord?

Reason #168 for the disbanding of all national bishops' conferences.

LONDON,England, August 10, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A book published under the auspices of an official body of the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales, has angered Catholics in Britain for its attacks on Pope Benedict. "Catholic Social Justice: Theological and Practical Explorations," been denounced as a "withering attack" on Pope Benedict XVI and his encyclical, Deus Caritas Est. The book has been the subject of dozens of blog posts around Britain by mainstream Catholics, almost all denouncing it as an anti-Catholic Marxist diatribe.

The book is a volume of essays published by Caritas Social Action, the umbrella organization for Catholic social justice and aid organisations in England and Wales. The Caritas website says, "We are an agency of the Catholic Bishops' Conference of England and Wales and part of Caritas International."

chop

Thompson quotes one of the essays: "We may find that a particular person who calls himself a pro-life campaigner is merely an anti-abortionist. Although many of those with whom he campaigns are inspired to very positive action, he is energized only by the more negative aspects of the struggle in which he is involved. While he is convincing himself that he is motivated only by love, all that others see when they meet him is an avenger."

Another essay attacks those who try to uphold the traditional family: "Probing below the worst of the noisy rhetoric of the 'recovery of family values', one often finds a form of Christianity that is deeply connected to capitalism. Hence the association of 'traditional' families with financial as well as spiritual flourishing is made, and in one swift construction an entire capitalist economic system is also vindicated."

chop

He concludes, "How much evidence do Catholics need that the Bishops' Conference has been hijacked by left-wing activists working under the patronage of bishops who are in many cases doctrinaire socialists?"

We need no more; we have ample. And I don't mean just the Conference in Great Britain.

From Always Our Children, to the Brokeback Mountain scandal, to the verbose and worthless Faithful Citizenship the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has been nothing but a thorn in the side of the Church.

Viewed in a more mystical light, it has been nothing but a thorn in crown of Our Blessed Lord.

07/07/07 (II)

In with "Dominus Vobiscum;" out with the Barney Blessing.

(Sorry - embedded was disabled.)

07/07/07

For a little more perspective on the Motu Proprio -- consider that it means in with the Traditional Latin Mass; out with the Clown Mass.




(If you can stomache watching, you'll learn the deep symbolism of clown-ology when the timer reads about 8 minutes, and get a spark of excitement at about 4 minutes. Please stand for the Creed.)

Summorum Pontificum

Pope Benedict's release of the motu proprio entitled, "Summorum Pontificum" has generated headlines across the globe. But of all the articles one might read, I recommend this one from Catholic World News.

In it you will find a refreshing, orthodox perspective and analysis. Below I have posted excerpts (and my own commentary) for those who would rather pass up the wonderful opportunity to read it in full. ;)

The long-awaited motu proprio, which had been the subject of intensive speculation within the Church for more than a year, gives every priest the right to celebrate the Mass using the 1962 Missal, and instructs pastors to "willingly accept" requests from the faithful for access to the older liturgical form.

The 1962 Missal is more commonly referred to as the "Tridentine Mass" or the "Traditional Latin Mass." Some of the major differences (from the current Roman Missal, or "Novus Ordo" celebration at your typical Catholic parish) being a Mass almost entirely said in Latin, and the priest facing with the people -- not at them.

The new canonical norms established by Pope Benedict will take effect on September 14.

Pope Benedict emphasizes that there are not two different rites, but two different forms of the Roman rite: the ordinary form, according to the current Roman Missal, and the extraordinary form, which uses the Missal that was in universal use prior to the liturgical changes that followed the Second Vatican Council.

You can find and read the motu proprio issued on Saturday by the Holy Father here. And you can find the text of the Pope's accompanying letter, explaining the move here.

[In his letter, t]he Pope also acknowledges that some Catholics find a greater sense of reverence in the older liturgy--

Yup.

in what will now be known as the extraordinary form of the Roman rite.

With his motu proprio the Holy Father hopes to restore reverence through a wider use of the "extraordinary form" of the liturgy-- the Mass of the 1962 Missal. At the same time, it is clear, he hopes that the wider use of the old form, with its scrupulous attention to rubrics, will encourage a more faithful and reverent approach to the ordinary form in the Novus Ordo Mass.

What is new?

Summorum Pontificum states flatly that the old form of the Mass, the 1962 Missal, was never abrogated. Implicitly the Pope is recognizing that many faithful Catholics have suffered a grave injustice, since they were told that the old form of the liturgy was now forbidden.

Yup.

At present-- until the new norms established in the motu proprio take effect on September 14-- Catholics who seek access to the old Mass must petition their diocesan bishop, who may grant permission of the use of the 1962 Missal, under the terms of Pope John Paul's Ecclesia Dei-- or he may choose not to allow it.

With his new norms Pope Benedict recognizes that many bishops have not allowed the "wide and generous" access to the old form that his predecessor had encouraged.

(including the Archbishop of Seattle...and, unless you happen to live in Nebraska, most likely your bishop as well.)

Citing St. Paul's words to the Corinthians (2 Cor 6), the Pope now exhorts all bishops: "Let us generously open our hearts and make room for everything that the faith itself allows."

Sadly, as the Holy Father is well aware, most bishops need more than a simple exhortation from Rome to...listen to Rome.

Here's to the stripping of some red hats, and perhaps vigorous implementation of Canon Law 401§2 which reads, "A diocesan Bishop who, because of illness or some other grave reason, has become unsuited for the fulfillment of his office, is earnestly requested to offer his resignation from office."

But I digress.

But Pope Benedict goes beyond exhortation, and establishes the rights of the faithful in terms of canon law. Every priest has the right to use the "extraordinary form," and needs no further permission. Wherever a "stable group" of parishioners asks for the old Mass, their pastor should "willingly accept" their request, the Pope adds.

Long live Pope Benedict!

In ordinary parishes he envisions the use of the "extraordinary form" for one Sunday Mass. He stipulates that the 1962 Missal should not be used for the Easter Triduum in parishes, since during the Triduum the entire parish is drawn together for the celebration in the ordinary form.

What the motu proprio is not

Because much coverage of the motu proprio has been misleading-- especially in the secular media-- it is important to be clear about several things that Summorum Pontificum does not do, and several effects that the Holy Father obviously does not intend:

1. The motu proprio does not restore the use of Latin to the liturgy. Priests have always had the right to use Latin in celebrating the Novus Ordo liturgy-- the "ordinary" form of the Roman rite. Indeed the use of Latin has always been strongly encouraged by the Vatican, even if few pastors have responded.

2. The motu proprio does not require priests to use the older liturgy. Pope Benedict is not imposing any new liturgical forms; he is allowing the faithful to make use of an old form-- which, as he carefully points out, was never banned. Those lay Catholics who prefer the post-conciliar liturgy have no cause for concern; the new liturgy will remain the commonplace experience in most parishes.

[chop]

In America, the liturgy committee of the US bishops' conference has already released a special newsletter dedicated to Summorum Pontificum, including both the papal documents themselves and a series of questions and answers about the new norms and the extraordinary form of the liturgy. Particularly in light of the hostility that the US bishops' committee has sometimes exhibited toward liturgical norms from Rome, the newsletter offers a remarkably even-handed and sympathetic perspective on the motu proprio.

In particular it is gratifying to read that the US bishops' liturgy committee recognizes the many Catholics have been troubled by the Novus Ordo liturgy because of "the false sense of creativity unfortunately practiced by some in the celebration of the post-conciliar liturgical rites." Citing the words of Pope Benedict, the newsletter notes that this "creative" approach has led to "deformations of the liturgy which were hard to bear." Insofar as the US bishops are now officially recognizing that experimentation has deformed the liturgy, Summorum Pontificum is already yielding rich fruit.

First Lincoln, and now Omaha

It seems the state of Nebraska is the unofficial capital of orthodox Catholicism in America.

Lincoln, Nebraska has long been known (among faithful, traditional-minded Catholics) for its bishop, Fabian Bruskewitz who, among other things, has publicly excommunicated members of Planned Parenthood and Call to Action. Lincoln is also the (American) diocese with the highest number of vocations (per capita), and is the only diocese without altar girls.

But now there's great news of yet another Nebraskan prelate, Archbishop Curtiss of Omaha. Here is a letter written by His Excellency which I found posted on The Cafeteria is Closed.

June 5, 2007

Letters to the Editor

U.S.Catholic
205 W. Monroe St.
Chicago, IL 60606

Dear Editor,

I would like to respond to the article in your June edition entitled "A Betrothal Proposal" by Michael G. Lawler and Gail S. Risch.

The teaching of the Catholic Church about fornication is clear and unambiguous: it is always objectively a serious sin (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church #1755, #1852, #2353). Couples who live together without marriage do in fact live in sin objectively.

Because the position of the authors is contrary to Church teaching about the intrinsic evil of fornication, I have disassociated the Omaha Archdiocese from the Center for Marriage and Family at Creighton University.

Neither Lawler nor Risch are reliable teachers of Catholic moral theology, and certainly are not spokespeople for the Church regarding human sexuality and sacramental marriage.

I remain sincerely yours in Christ,

Most Reverend Elden Francis Curtiss

Archbishop of Omaha

Rhode Island Catholic

In 2005, the Diocese of Providence, RI was blessed to receive a new pastor: Bishop Thomas J. Tobin. Consistent with the growing trend of new bishops and priests, Tobin (59) is concerned more with the salvation of souls than with promoting scandal or wasting millions (from the collection basket) on modern monstrosities.

For instance, yesterday Tobin announced a complete revamping of the diocesan paper. To get an idea of what sort of changes His Excellency is making, contrast the new name of the paper with its old name. Starting today, The Providence Visitor will be the Rhode Island Catholic. Commenting on why the need for a new name, Tobin quipped that "Visitor" sounded more like a tourist guide than a Catholic publication.

And let there be no doubt -- this paper is no tourist guide.

An editorial in today's paper states, “We will not print opinions that are in contradiction of church teaching — any more than a newspaper for, say, Greenpeace would print a letter in support of the slaughter of whales.”

With a circulation of about 30,000, Catholics throughout the diocese also get to read the bishop's column titled "Without a Doubt," which this week slams Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani for his support of abortion rights.

You can read the column in full here.

Allow me to post a few excerpts:

"I have no idea why I received an invitation to Giuliani’s fundraiser. I don’t know the mayor; I’ve never met him. I try to avoid partisan politics. Heck, I’m not even a Republican. But most of all, I would never support a candidate who supports legalized abortion.

"Rudy’s public proclamations on abortion are pathetic and confusing. Even worse, they’re hypocritical.

[chop]

"Rudy’s explanation is a classic expression of the position on abortion we’ve heard from weak-kneed politicians so frequently in recent years:

"“I’m personally opposed to but don’t want to impose my views on other people.” The incongruity of that position has been exposed many times now. As I’ve asked previously, would we let any politician get away with the same pathetic cop-out on other issues: “I’m personally opposed to . . . racial discrimination, sexual abuse, prostitution, drug abuse, polygamy, incest . . . but don’t want to impose my beliefs on others?”

"Why is it that when I hear someone explaining this position, I think of the sad figure of Pontius Pilate in the Gospels, who personally found no guilt in Jesus, but for fear of the crowd, washed his hands of the whole affair and handed Jesus over to be crucified. I can just hear Pilate saying, “You know, I’m personally opposed to crucifixion but I don’t want to impose my belief on others.”

[chop]

"Rudy’s defection from the Catholic Faith on this moral issue is not unique, of course. Catholic politicians of both parties, nationwide, have followed a similar path in abandoning the Faith for the sake of political expediency: Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, Pat Leahy, Nancy Pelosi, and Joe Biden come quickly to mind. And on a local level, of course, Congressman Patrick Kennedy and Senator Jack Reed. How these intelligent men and women will someday stand before the judgment seat of God and explain why they legitimized the death of countless innocent children in the sin of abortion is beyond me. (But God, really, I was personally opposed to it, but just couldn’t do anything about it.”)

"Oh well, as you can see by now, I won’t be attending the fundraiser for Rudy Giuliani. If Rudy wants to see me, he’ll have to arrange an appointment at my office. We’ll talk about his position on abortion. And if he wants a photo, it will cost him $1,500 as a donation for the pro-life work of the Church."


Now if only we could get Archbishop Brunette to do the same with our very own Catholic Regress.

Mahoney Takes First Place Award

Agnus Daily has transformed the pitiful and depressing state of Cardinal Mahoney's Archdiocese into a fictional news piece -- creating something we can at least chuckle about. There are moments when laughter is required, else we will go mad from all the madness. Sometimes it's good to have a good laugh at the madness His Eminence emanates.

LOS ANGELES, CA - The Center for Dance and Performaing Arts has bestowed it’s coveted “Best Proving Ground for Performance Experience Award” to the Archdiocese of Los Angeles. This award typically goes to performing arts venues and other establishments that not only embrace modern art and dance, but also assist in developing the experience necessary to provide a springboard for employment in professional theater and media ...

“Sunday Mass provides an interesting challenge for me.” explains Sarah Connelly, an interpretive dancer at St. Xavier’s Parish, “Sometimes the pastor wants me to dance throughout the whole Mass. It’s hard finding innovative ways to translate things like ‘Theosis’, ‘Hypostatic Union’, and all of the Beatitudes into bodily motions, but somehow I find a way!”

My kind of bishop...

From Whispers:

According to Thavis via Vatican Radio, this year's Lenten retreat will fall to the archbishop-emeritus of Bologna, Cardinal Giacomo Biffi.

Cardinal Biffi was said to be a strong supporter of the pope in the conclave that elected him in 2005. The cardinal is well-known in Italy for his sometimes provocative statements; in 2000, he suggested that the Italian government should favor Catholic immigrants to offset the number of Muslim immigrants and protect Italy's "national identity."

Among other notable quotables from Biffi, a Milan native -- and Ambrose scholar -- who retired in 2004 yet remains papal elector for another 16 months: likening women's ordination to using Coke in lieu of altar wine; comparing the rainbow flag of Italy's peace movements to the banner of Arcigay, the country's flagship gay-rights group; and, most memorably, his Jubilee Year assertion that, as the BBC headlined it, the "Antichrist is a vegetarian."

More Seamless-Garbage

From the interview at California Catholic Daily:

Ed Cavagnaro: Of course, [Pro-abort Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi] has a big say in the direction of the country and the legislative agenda, certainly. Other than this issue [of abortion], what other issues do you feel that she should concentrate on? What is important to you as an archbishop?

Archbishop George Niederauer: I think all the issues are important. I think the life issues are important, like euthanasia, like abortion, but of course there is another life issue where you would find the side switching very quickly, and that is the death, -- the death penalty -- capital punishment. I think we would find ourselves in agreement with a whole different group of people who would be -- have a very similar but opposed opinion with regard to, well let’s say abortion. I think health care for everyone, I think is an important issue. I think affordable housing is an important issue. I think immigration reform. I think there is an hypocrisy, whereby we say, we send forth this message, as a country – I think we are anyway -- “Don’t you dare cross our borders but if you do we have a great job for you.” Something has to be done about that. Something has to be done about splitting up families. So that people can -- can try to support themselves and their families. Those are all, I think, issues. And I think an issue that is compelling to all of us right now is the war in Iraq.

We'll put aside the nonsense of equating affordable housing and immigration reform with abortion. For the sake of argument, let's give the good bishop (and anyone of like mind) some breathing room and assume the death penalty is just as deplorable as abortion (note: which it isn't).

In America last year, 53 criminals paid an early visit to their Maker via painless, lethal injection. During that same period of time, an estimated 1.31 million babies were tortured to death in their mothers' wombs. That's a ratio of 24,717:1 (babies:criminals).

So logic would dictate, just going off the numbers (again, wrongly assuming DP = Abortion), our time and effort should be correspondingly divided between the two.

In other words, every sixty seconds Niederauer uses to speak out against capital punishment, should be balanced with 412 hours of (non-stop) verbal opposition to abortion.

And every $100 spent by the USCCB on fighting the death penalty, should be balanced with $2.4 million fighting the war in the womb.

Memo to the USCCB: How about it?