POPE BETTY XVI 666 QUEEN OF HOMOPHOBIA

http://popebettyxvi666queenofhomophobia.blogspot.com/2007/12/pope-betty-xvi-666-queen-of-homophobia.html


skip to main | skip to sidebar
POPE BETTY XVI 666 QUEEN OF HOMOPHOBIA

Monday, December 10, 2007
POPE BETTY XVI 666 QUEEN OF HOMOPHOBIA
POPE BETTY XVI 666 QUEEN OF HOMOPHOBIA
http://romancatholicblog.typepad.com/roman_catholic_blog/theology/index.html

Roman Catholic BlogAboutEmail Me Insight Scoop
The lady doth protest too much. And so poorly.
L.A. Times: Christians, not filmmakers, ruined "The Golden Compass"
The Perfect Faith of the Blessed Virgin
Turn Your Hearts!
Pullman fans talk trash and pull back the curtain
Catholic World News Top Headlines (CWNews.com)
The speech JFK should have given
New Vatican statement to address central doctrinal dispute
Turkey allows celebration of St. Nicholas feast
Papal preacher begins Advent meditations
New Polish premier meets Pope, discusses country's role in Europe
The Curt Jester
Imagine
New Vatican Commision
Self-parody
Meme Christmas
Priestblock 25487
JIMMY AKIN.ORG
Driven to Pray
Not Impressed
Approved Translations
Combox Critique Roundup at Old World Swine
Spe Salvi
Poor Box
Render Unto Us

Powered by TypePad Monday, December 10, 2007
Vatican Document On Evangelization Expected Soon


Here's the story: New Vatican statement to address central doctrinal dispute

Here is a quote:

The Vatican will release a new document on evangelization next week, with officials in Rome indicating that it will be an important statement on the duty to spread the Catholic faith.
The subject of the new document, which is being released under the auspices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, is evangelization. The document will be released on December 14.

The importance that the Vatican attaches to the subject is reflected by the list of ranking officials who will participate in a news conference introducing the document. Three cardinals will join in presenting the subject to the press. And because the three cardinals head three separate Vatican congregations, it is clear that the document is the product of careful preparation involving several dicasteries.

Cardinal William Levada, the prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, will chair the December 14 presentation, assisted by Archbishop Angelo Amato, the secretary of the Congregation. They will be joined by Cardinals Ivan Dias and Francis Arinze: the prefects of the Congregation for Evangelization and Congregation for Divine Worship, respectively.

While Vatican officials have not announced a title for the document, or given a topic more specific than the broad theme of evangelization, informed officials suggested that this important new statement would address a lingering controversy over the claim that the Catholic Church is the one true Church of Christ.


This is a big deal.

Here's more:

In July of this year, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith released, a document entitled "Responses to Some Questions Regarding Certain Aspects of the Doctrine on the Church", reaffirming the central role of Jesus Christ and the Catholic Church in the plan of salvation. That document, released without fanfare, revived a controversy that had been ignited in 2000 by Dominus Iesus, a powerful statement released by the same Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (headed at that time by then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger), which affirmed the traditional Catholic teaching that the Christ and his Church provide the only means of salvation.
The new Vatican document is expected to carry the argument of Dominus Iesus a step further, explaining that because of the unique role played by the Church in the plan of redemption, Catholics have an obligation to spread the faith, thus offering others the best means of attaining salvation.


This will help in three ways:

1) It will clear up yet another difficulty in relations between the Catholic Church and the Society of St. Pius X.

2) It will make clear that so-called progressives who have denied or watered down the notion the need for conversion to the Catholic Faith and/or snubbed the articulation of the truth that the Catholic Church is the One, True, Church of Christ as an expression of "triumphalism" have been in error.

3) Most importantly, it will restate and clarify authentic Catholic doctrine, thereby instructing the faithful on what it means to be Catholic and what is required of believing Catholics.

It's actually a very exciting document, and one of the most important things the Holy See has done in a long time.

I suspect this document will be controversial and, because it expresses the truth that the Catholic Faith possesses the fullness of revealed truth and is the perfection of divine revelation and that other religions possess truth only in so far as they agree with the Catholic Faith, Pope Benedict XVI will be criticized even more than Ann Coulter when she said that Christianity is the perfection of Judaism.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, December 10, 2007 at 09:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, December 08, 2007
"Golden Compass" Disappoints At The Box Office


Here's the story: "Golden Compass" disappoints at box office

Part of the reason people aren't seeing it is that it's getting bad reviews. Some have called it "long and boring".

As I said before:

I haven't read the series, but I believe the books are bad and the film should be avoided. I've deliberately avoided writing about the subject, because my concern is that lots of protests will only become free advertising for a film that looks like it could easily bomb at the box office. It's gotten bad reviews. (44% Fresh Rating at Rotten Tomatoes) Moreover, it stars Nicole Kidman, whose films are frequently unsuccessful at the box office. She won an Academy Award for her role in The Hours, but I never saw it, and I have lots of company in that regard. After looking over her filmography, I think it's say it's safe to say she's been in a lot of movies nobody has seen: Nicole Kidman

I think people are afraid the Golden Compass is going to be the next Harry Potter, but I don't think it's unreasonable to hope it's the next Lemony Snicket's A Series of Unfortunate Events.

If Catholics can manage to be educated about the film and encourage others to stay away from it without giving the film publicity, I'd say there's a fair chance people won't see the film.

Nicole Kidman tried to tell people she's a good Catholic and wouldn't be in an anti-Catholic film. Here's a quote from a review describing Margot at the Wedding, another currently released film starring Kidman:

"Then, there's the scene of Nicole Kidman (Margot) masturbating. That seems to be the entire purpose of this weird, dreadful-to-the-nth movie: showing us these people's gross private parts..."
A good Catholic, indeed.

See also: So Many Things, So Little Time: A Post On Many Things

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, December 08, 2007 at 06:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, December 06, 2007
Mitt Romney's Faith In America Speech

Mitt Romney is introduced about four minutes and thirty seconds into the video.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, December 06, 2007 at 12:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, December 03, 2007
Pope Benedict XVI's Encyclical: Spe Salvi ("In hope we were saved")


If you haven't read Pope Benedict XVI's new encyclical, you should. It's worth reading. It's intellectually rich, and yet written in a style that is both accessible and informative. Whatever else may be said of Pope Benedict XVI, he's an excellent teacher and communicator.

You can read the encyclical on the Vatican website here: Encyclical Letter, Spe Salvi, Of The Supreme Pontiff, Benedict XVI, To The Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Men And Women Religious, And All The Lay Faithful, On Christian Hope

From Zenit: Pope Benedict Sums Up "Spe Salvi", Says God Is Hope of the World

From Catholic News Agency: Spe Salvi – Pope's new encyclical calls for a rediscovery of hope

Rorate Caeli has a good insight here: Spe Salvi: the Anti-Gaudium et Spes

Sandro Magister of Chiesa News gives and overview here: "In hope we were saved", Pope Benedict's Second Encyclical

Science, reason, and progress fulfill many expectations, but they do not give "eternal life." Pope Joseph Ratzinger brings Christians and the world back before the judgment of God. And he proposes as examples two of the most humble and unknown saints.
* * *

The encyclical on hope "Spe Salvi," which Benedict XVI signed and published today, the feast of Saint Andrew and just two days before the beginning of Advent, was motivated by these factors described in paragraph 22:
"A self-critique of modernity is needed in dialogue with Christianity and its concept of hope.

"In this dialogue Christians too, in the context of their knowledge and experience, must learn anew in what their hope truly consists, what they have to offer to the world and what they cannot offer.

"Flowing into this self-critique of the modern age there also has to be a self-critique of modern Christianity, which must constantly renew its self-understanding setting out from its roots."

In this twofold "self-criticism" of modern culture and Christianity, the pope continues, "reason and faith need one another in order to fulfil their true nature and their mission."

* * *

These few lines clearly show how strongly the encyclical is marked by Joseph Ratzinger as philosopher, theologian, and pope.

But it would be a mistake to expect to read in it nothing more than an erudite lecture. The style is vibrant, the exposition rich with imagery, and the narrative enlivened by a wide cast of characters.

The entire story of the world passes before the eyes of the reader, from its beginning to end. The final pages on Christ as judge, on hell, on purgatory, on paradise, are stunning for their mere presentation – having disappeared almost completely from the preaching in the churches – and even more for the way in which they are developed.

The text is required reading from start to finish, as is always the case for the writings of Benedict XVI, which never have just one key page or the easily isolated central passage.


I have not yet finished reading the encyclical, but intend to do so. It's very good and worth reading.

Any thoughts (especially if you've read Spe Salvi)?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, December 03, 2007 at 07:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, November 28, 2007
"Father Dale" Fallout: Life Teen Founder Indicted For Sexual Misconduct With Young Men Is At Odds With His Diocese


Dale Fushek, the founder of Life Teen, who has been indicted for predatory homosexual acts with minors, thinks it's okay for priests who resign in disgrace to officiate at non-denominational worship services. His diocese doesn't agree with him.

Before reading about the fallout, if you aren't familiar with the details of the case against Fushek, you can read about them here: For 20 Years Dale Fushek Was the Golden Boy of the Phoenix Catholic Diocese. Now, His Golden Boys Are Talking

See also: Fushek Sex Charges Aren't Tossed out

Here's the story: "Father Dale" Fallout

Here's a quote:

Father Dale Fushek is still waiting on the courts to decide if he is eligible for a trial by jury. But Fushek is not waiting to conduct services again. The former St. Timothy's priest has opened his own prayer and worship center, a non-denominational service at the Mesa Convention Center. More than 500 people attended his first service on Thanksgiving day and he plans on holding more services in December.
But according to the Diocese of Phoenix, Fushek is still officially a priest on administrative leave and he has been specifically instructed not to conduct public or sacred ministries.

Those concerns were also communicated to St. Tim's parishioners on Sunday, when current St. Timothy's Pastor Jack Spaulding told churchgoers "he could not and would not support him in this."


See also: Indicted Life Teen Founder Starts Non-Denominational "Worship Center"

My thoughts:

Fr. Dale is veering into schism through pride. He's got some pretty serious allegations being made about him, and one would think he'd be more concerned about facing that than trying to resurrect his glory days with Life Teen.

Any thoughts?

Continue reading ""Father Dale" Fallout: Life Teen Founder Indicted For Sexual Misconduct With Young Men Is At Odds With His Diocese" »

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 at 04:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)
On Tape: Homosexual Activist U.S. Priest Blasts Vatican Cardinal and Archbishop over Homosexuality During Homily


Dante and Virgil in Hell by William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1850)

Special thanks to St. John's Valdosta Blog (which is excellent) for pointing out this LifeSite News story.

Here's the story: ON TAPE: U.S. Priest Blasts Vatican Cardinal and Archbishop over Homosexuality During Homily

Here's a quote:

In the diocese of Saint Paul-Minneapolis, Fr. Leo Tibesar has been controversial for years when it comes to homosexuality and the Church's teaching. Last year LifeSiteNews.com reported that the website of Dignity USA, the most prominent US lobby organization fighting Catholic teaching on human sexuality "from within" the Church, featured Fr. Tibesar as a member of the organization's National Leadership Team.
Now an audio recording of a homily which Fr. Tibesar gave on Saturday October 27 which took aim at an Archbishop, a Vatican Cardinal, and a prominent Evangelical preacher has been posted online. The Archdiocesan spokesman had only recently heard of the incident and could not provide comment when contacted by LifeSiteNews.com

The Gospel reading for that Sunday (also the Saturday evening liturgy) concerned the story of the Pharisee and the tax collector recorded in Luke 18:9-14, where Christ praises the repentant sinner over the self-righteous Pharisee.

However in his homily Fr. Tibesar, pastor of Saint Frances Cabrini Church, cast the Archbishop and Cardinal in the role of Pharisee and those who unrepentantly counter Church teaching on homosexuality as worthy of the praise of Christ.

"What would Jesus say today if he were telling the parable in our Gospel of Luke?," asked the priest as he began a series of four versions of his retelling.

In version 3 of his retelling, Fr. Tibesar preached: "Two people came into Church to pray, one was a Catholic Archbishop who refuses communion to Rainbow Sash people at the Cathedral on Pentecost Sunday who prayed "I give you thanks oh God that I am not like others - greedy, dishonest or like others who need to make their dissent from official Church teaching so public and divisive."

"The other were Rainbow parents of GLBT people at the Cathedral on Pentecost who stood off on the side and prayed, "Oh God be merciful to us for failing to attend our own Churches more often; they say they love God then turn there backs on us in hate directly contrary to 1:John,4 - whoever loves God must also love the neighbor."

He concluded the point: "Jesus concluded the last ones went home more worthy in God's sight than the first."

With regard to the Vatican Cardinal, Fr. Tibesar took issue with the prohibition on the use of condoms. "Two people came into Church to pray, one was a Roman Catholic Cardinal in Charge of Church doctrine who prayed "I give you thanks oh God that I am not like others - greedy dishonest or like those living in Africa where AIDS is killing everyone even there we can never allow condoms to be used."

"The other was an African widow dying of AIDS who stood off to the side and prayed "Oh God, be merciful to me for not refusing the advances of my husband without a condom, soon I will follow him to the grave and leave our six children orphans," he continued.

"Jesus concluded - the last person went home more worthy in God's sight than the first."

Finally taking aim at the Evangelical pastor, Fr. Tibesar recited the fourth version of his narrative. "Two people came into Church to pray. One was an Evangelical pastor whose regional services are broadcast nationally who prayed "I give you thanks oh God that I am not like others - greedy, dishonest or like others who give into same gender sex drives which the bible calls an abomination."

"The others who came into Church to pray for a same sex couple raising children born by way of donor insemination who prayed: "Oh god, be merciful to us for not finding our own medium to share with the broader audience the biblical passage of 1 John 4:16 - God is love and when we abide in love we abide in God and God in us."

The homily grossly distorts Catholic teaching which teaches that all persons must be loved, and that the sin of homosexual sex acts are disordered and hurtful to the individuals involved in them.


To hear the homily online click here: Fr. Leo Tibesar's homily on homosexuality

My thoughts:

I wonder what Fr. Tibesar would say about this: French police detain 'drag queen' over 18 gay murders

Homosexuals represent 4% to 6% of the general population, at most. Some statistics have the number at 1% of the population. Why are so many serial killers homosexuals? Here's a few I came up with off the top of my head: Jeffrey Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy, Aileen Wuornos, Andrew Cunanan. Here is a list of over fifty homosexuals who were serial killers: Homosexual Serial Killers

More after the jump...

Continue reading "On Tape: Homosexual Activist U.S. Priest Blasts Vatican Cardinal and Archbishop over Homosexuality During Homily" »

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, November 28, 2007 at 10:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (39) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, November 26, 2007
Catholic Bishops On Voting For Pro-Abortion Candidates


The fact that the United States bishops produced a document confusing enough to suggest that Catholics in the United States can vote for pro-abortion candidates and occasioning a CNN report where bishops are said to be giving "leeway" on this issue is nothing short of scandalous, but I'll get to that later.

First I want to comment on a post by Amy Welborn.

Amy Welborn (here's a biography she wrote up on herself) recently commented on an interview between Archbishop Chaput and John Allen on her new blog, Charlotte Was Both.

Here's the post: Facing up

I read Amy's post a while back, and it has been on my mind for a while.

Here's a quote:
As I noted a couple of days ago, Archbishop Chaput had this to say in an interview with John Allen:

What do you think it means?
As you know, I have written a book [on faith and politics], and in it I write that it means a reason we could confidently explain to the Lord Jesus and the victims of abortion when we meet them at the end of our lives, and we will meet them. I think there are legitimate reasons you could vote in favor of someone who wouldn’t be where the church is on abortion, but it would have to be a reason that you could confidently explain to Jesus and the victims of abortion when you meet them at the Judgment. That’s the only criterion. It can’t be that we favor a particular party, or that we’re hostile to the war, or so on.

Some might sneer at this at being insufficiently nuanced for the complexities of political decision-making…but…

He’s right.

Teachers - especially teachers of religion - know all about minimalism, because that’s the Way of the Student. As much as your students may rail against minimalism and legalism, it’s where most of them (and us) live. So, after a hour-long, sensitive discussion of say, sexual morality, I can guarantee you that at the end, someone - usually a boy leaning his chair against the back wall - is going to raise his hand and say, “So…you’re saying that if my girlfriend and I go to second base….we’re both going to Hell?”

And he thinks he’s gotcha.

The same kind of reductiveness infects supposedly adult conversations about the choices we make as disciples of Jesus. Much of it seems to me to emerge as a consequence of the dynamic between the minutiae-obsessed legalism of the past and then the rather extreme reaction (especially as interpreted by popularizers of what Haring said) of the “fundamental option”

Or, as I like to say, “We are all good Catholics now.”

This could easily veer into a discussion of all sorts of other things like justification and forgiveness and scrupulosity and so on, but I’ll try to keep it from going that way. It’s just this simple, in my mind:

We are accountable for all of our choices, and all of our choices involve saying “yes” to something and “no” to something else.

When we choose to spend money on a movie, on a dinner out, on a new house, on a trip, we are saying “yes” to that and “no” to other ways that we could spend that money. We are, face it, saying “yes” to ourselves and “no” to others who have less than we have.

(Now the voting thing is a little different because it involves, usually, saying “yes” to some things you really should be saying “no” to, no matter how “ideal” your candidate is. But the point is still - it’s okay to acknowledge that this is, at some level, a sell-out for which we are responsible, because we cast our own votes. So, “Can I vote for X” and still be a Good Catholic?” is really the same question that my student asked above. It’s the wrong question, and one shaped in order to excuse and justify. We all do it.)


I wasn't thrilled with Archbishop Chaput's solution, not because I think it's erroneous, but rather, because I think it's confusing and it doesn't help Catholics who generally vote for pro-abortion candidates understand why the reasons the justifications most of them use for voting for pro-abortion candidates would not be acceptable to Jesus or victims of abortion.

I was troubled by what Amy Welborn wrote because it seemed to suggest that those who say Catholics sin by voting for pro-abortion candidates are oversimplifying things and reasoning out a complex moral issue in a way that is immature (so much so that it can be likened to the moral reasoning used by high school students).

However, Amy let me know (vie e-mail) that I misunderstood her. She explained that this was what she meant:

What I was saying was that it does matter and that I agree with Archbishop Chaput. The examples I was giving were examples of how people who want to weasel their way out of the significance of a vote for a particular candidate do so. I was saying that those who say that we don't sin by voting for a particular Catholic are like my student, seeking to look at things simplistically in order to justify their own behavior.
She also explained:

I am against voting for pro-abortion candidates of any party, and have been clear about that for years. And I do despise the GOP. They use the pro-life community for a few votes (and more importantly) boots on the ground to do canvassing and so on, and in reality simply despise them and wish they would go away.
One more thing. I think what confused you (and perhaps is confusing) is this:

So, "Can I vote for X" and still be a Good Catholic?" is really the same question that my student asked above. It's the wrong question, and one shaped in order to excuse and justify. We all do it.)

That was directed at those who want to vote for pro-abortion candidates, the kind of apologists you see on liberal Catholic websites all over the place, who want to twist and turn things so that whoever they vote for, whether it be Hilary or GIulani, they kind find a line in a USCCB doc or something that makes it all okay.

I am opposed to all pro-abortion candidates, would never vote for one, never have and think that those who do are complicit in abortion.

What else can I say?

I think Chaput was correct, and the reductionists I was speaking of are the liberals - who want to excuse voting for a pro-abort and who would sneer at Chaput for daring to say that the vote matters.

I can understand why you were confused. In reading it, I can see how the accusation of reductionism might seem to apply to Chaput. But it wasn't. It was intended to be addressed at those who would oppose him and accuse him of reductionism. So I suppose it's partly my fault. But the truth is, the voting thing wasn't at the top of my mind. I was using it for a broader reflection on what yes and no mean, none of which ended up having anything to do with voting. I had a nagging thought in the back of my mind as I wrote it that I should come back to the voting, but I couldn't figure out how to work it in.

As I said, it is garbled, so I understand. But I really don't know what to tell you to do about it, because you accuse me of saying it's okay to vote for pro-abort candidates, when I don't think it is okay, and I have said so a million times.


Before I say anything else, I want to say that I'm not trying to attack Amy Welborn. I respect her in many ways (which may mean nothing to her, given my comments here and my general positions on political issues and even issues dealing with Catholic morality). In any event, I don't want it to seem like I'm picking on her (though if I were, I am confident she would be more than capable of defending herself).

I have to admit something that was coloring/informing my perspective on Amy's comments:

I know that Amy Welborn has said (in the comments section of her old blog on a post titled Nancy-Palooza) this about the Republican party:

This thread is already taking a direction that is, frankly, pissing me off. There is absolutely no need to come here and prance about pro-abort GOP-ers to demonstrate your bona fides. Long-time readers know that we despise the GOP around here, pretty much. This is not a Dem v. GOP issue. This is a Nancy Pelosi on January 3 at Mass at Trinity College in the Archdiocese of Washington issue.
But, as usual, the conversation just repeats itself.


When commenters objected to Amy's claim that "we despise the GOP around here", she made this clarification:

Sorry, all. The "we" despising the GOP referred to me alone.
I wish I had a better understanding of where Amy was coming from with respect to her position on voting for pro-abortion candidates in general (Republican or Democrat), and supporting the Democrats in particular, who have what amounts to support for "abortion on demand" as part of their party platform. I should have e-mailed her to ask her for clarification, and I'm grateful for her clarification now and her patience with me in private correspondence.

My sense when reading her post on Archbishop Chaput's comments was that she seemed to be non-committal on the morality of voting for pro-abortion politicians. However, I was wrong, and that was due to a lack of familiarity with the many times she has explained her opposition to voting for pro-abortion candidates regardless of their political party.

More thoughts:

It is a grave evil and objectively serious matter (which combined with sufficient reflection and full consent would constitute a mortal sin) to vote for a pro-abortion candidate if the vote is cast specifically because of their support for legal, elective abortion.

St. Thomas Aquinas recognized that there are times when one human act will have good and bad effects.

Under these circumstances, it is permissible to perform an action that will produce unintended evil effects if you meet these four conditions:

1. The action itself is morally neutral or morally good.
2. The bad effect is not the means by which the good effect is achieved.

3. The motive must be the achievement of the good effect only.

4. The good effect is at least equivalent in importance to the bad effect.


St. Thomas Aquinas discusses the principle of double effect here: Summa Theologica, Second Part of the Second Part, Question 64. Murder, Article 7. Whether it is lawful to kill a man in self-defense?

With respect to the issue of voting for pro-abortion candidates...

I will admit that the principle of double effect would permit a Catholic to vote for a pro-abortion candidate for reasons unrelated to their abortion stance.

The only example where the principle of double effect would permit a Catholic to vote for a pro-abortion candidate that I can think of would be in order to save as many or more human lives as those lost through legal, elective abortion; furthermore, these lives would need to be in immediate danger or there would need to be at least a serious risk that these lives would be lost if the pro-life candidate were elected instead of the pro-abortion candidate.

I will explain why I believe it's better to vote for pro-life Republicans than pro-abortion Democrats after the jump...

Continue reading "Catholic Bishops On Voting For Pro-Abortion Candidates" »

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, November 26, 2007 at 09:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, November 25, 2007
The Tridentine Mass Returns to St. Mary's by the Sea


The Extraordinary Form of the Roman Rite, also known as the Tridentine Mass, will be regularly celebrated at 12:00 PM on Sundays, beginning on the 1st Sunday of Advent, December 2, 2007.

For details, click the links below:

Bishop Tod David Brown's letter to St. Mary's by the Sea clergy & parishioners dated November 9, 2007

St. Mary's by the Sea parish bulletin for November 25, 2007

Here's an e-mail from a reader:

There seems to be a little face-saving going on in the good bishop's letter. According to our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI, the Tridentine Mass was never outlawed, so Father Johnson and his successors never really needed the bishop's permission to celebrate it. We are nonetheless grateful that the bishop has given not so much his permission but his buy-in to what the pope has already clarified and permitted. Bishop Brown is doing this late, having thrown a tantrum that temporarily put a stop to plans to implement the pope's orders immediately at the time that the Motu Proprio went into effect. This was clearly contrary to the wishes of Pope Benedict, and spokesmen for the pope have since made clear that the pope demands an end to the foot-dragging by bishops and priests around the world. So our bishop, who has no doubt been preoccupied with the Monsignor Urell scandal and his own legal problems, finds himself in the awkward and embarrassing position of scurrying to get to the front of the parade.
Perhaps to save face and divert attention, Bishop Brown seems to be scolding the parish for "divisiveness and intolerance." I was at St. Mary's before and during the whole kneeling controversy and other events that brought international attention to the little Huntington Beach parish -- and ridicule to our bishop and diocese. The only divisiveness and intolerance that I saw was on the part of the bishop and his henchmen toward traditional piety. This caused a wholesale exodus form the parish and the accompanying sharp reduction in collection-plate donations. So with regard to divisiveness and intolerance, I would respectfully suggest that the bishop sweep first the dirt on his own doorstep.

Imagine the peace and unity the parish would be enjoying if, after the retirement of the saintly Father Johnson, the parish had been allowed to continue without the bungling, unholy interference from Marywood. It was really interference for the sake of interference, rooted in the sin of pride. I hope that this letter is a sign that the bishop has decided to put aside his pride, lay down his cudgel and truly allow the restoration of the sacred at St. Mary's. What a wonderful blessing as we prepare the way for the Christmas season of peace on Earth, and good will to all men. As always, I pray for our bishop and priests.


I couldn't have said it better.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, November 25, 2007 at 04:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Dinesh D'Souza Defending Christianity




Two more Dinesh D'Souza appearances after the jump...

Continue reading "Dinesh D'Souza Defending Christianity" »

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, November 21, 2007 at 08:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, November 20, 2007
The Daily Telegraph: Pope To Purge The Vatican of Modern Music


The Daily Telegraph reports, "The Pope is considering a dramatic overhaul of the Vatican in order to force a return to traditional sacred music."

Here's the story: Pope to purge the Vatican of modern music

Here's an extended quote:

After reintroducing the Latin Tridentine Mass, the Pope wants to widen the use of Gregorian chant and baroque sacred music.
In an address to the bishops and priests of St Peter's Basilica, he said that there needed to be "continuity with tradition" in their prayers and music.

He referred pointedly to "the time of St Gregory the Great", the pope who gave his name to Gregorian chant.

Gregorian chant has been reinstituted as the primary form of singing by the new choir director of St Peter's, Father Pierre Paul.

He has also broken with the tradition set up by John Paul II of having a rotating choir, drawn from churches all over the world, to sing Mass in St Peter's.

The Pope has recently replaced the director of pontifical liturgical celebrations, Archbishop Piero Marini, with a man closer to his heart, Mgr Guido Marini. It is now thought he may replace the head of the Sistine Chapel choir, Giuseppe Liberto.

The International Church Music Review recently criticised the choir, saying: "The singers wanted to overshout each other, they were frequently out of tune, the sound uneven, the conducting without any artistic power, the organ and organ playing like in a second-rank country parish church."

Mgr Valentin Miserachs Grau, the director of the Pontifical Institute of Sacred Music, which trains church musicians, said that there had been serious "deviations" in the performance of sacred music.

"How far we are from the true spirit of sacred music. How can we stand it that such a wave of inconsistent, arrogant and ridiculous profanities have so easily gained a stamp of approval in our celebrations?" he said.

He added that a pontifical office could correct the abuses, and would be "opportune". He said: "Due to general ignorance, especially in sectors of the clergy, there exists music which is devoid of sanctity, true art and universality."

Mgr Grau said that Gregorian chant was the "cardinal point" of liturgical music and that traditional music "should become again the living soul of the assembly".

The Pope favoured the idea of a watchdog for church music when he was the cardinal in charge of safeguarding Catholic doctrine.


I always enjoy Gerald's posts on this topic at The Cafeteria Is Closed. Here are a couple gems:

Kicking butt and taking names

Angry screed - Let me tell you how I really feel

My thoughts:

Deo gratias!

One can only hope that such a purge will eventually save Catholics from the banal music heard in so many parishes.

It's time to put the ubiquitous "Here I Am Lord" (words and music are by Daniel L. Schutte, S.J.) out to pasture.

Incidentally, has anyone else noticed that a section of the chorus sounds exactly like a slower tempo version of the Brady Bunch theme?

Is it I Lord?/of a lovely lady
I have heard You, calling in the night/Who was bringing up three very lovely girls
This quote sums things up nicely:

“Two thousand years of music for the Christian church, including some very fine recent contributions, and all of it gets shoved aside for The Brady Bunch.” - Thomas Day, Why Catholics Can’t Sing, on “Here I Am, Lord”
More on Schutte here:

Schutte is a leader of the dreadful movement in modern liturgical music that has changed the emphasis of our hymns from adoring, praising, and glorifying God to pridefully asserting how wonderful and faithful and loving and marvelous We ourselves are. A discerning eye will note how often these new hymns mention "I" and "My" and "Us" and "Our" far more often than the Holy Trinity, the Blessed Eucharist, God the Father, Jesus Christ, the angels and saints, or even the wages of sin or the grace that saved a wretch such as "me."
More troubling is the fact that Schutte is no longer a priest but is now publicly identified as a partnered gay man. He is best known for his song, "Here I am, Lord, " a song that has become the anthem for the dissenting gay rights movement within the Catholic Church.

There should be, and probably are, Church laws against Catholic dioceses and colleges sponsoring workshops by former priests living what most Catholics consider a scandalous lifestyle. But as one of our local pastors quipped, when asked why his parish was making a liturgical change that violated Canon Law, "In this diocese, we don't obey Canon Law. We obey the bishop."


More after the jump...

Continue reading "The Daily Telegraph: Pope To Purge The Vatican of Modern Music" »

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, November 20, 2007 at 07:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, November 16, 2007
Cardinal Seán P. O'Malley On Democrats


His Eminence Seán Patrick Cardinal O'Malley, OFM Cap, Ph.D, was quoted in the Boston Globe discussing the Democratic party and its scandalous support for legal, elective abortion.

From the Boston Globe (via The Cafeteria Is Closed):

Cardinal Sean P. O'Malley of Boston, saying the Democratic Party has been persistently hostile to opponents of abortion rights, asserted yesterday that the support of many Catholics for Democratic candidates "borders on scandal." ...
"I think the Democratic Party, which has been in many parts of the country traditionally the party which Catholics have supported, has been extremely insensitive to the church's position, on the gospel of life in particular, and on other moral issues," O'Malley said.

Acknowledging that Catholic voters in Massachusetts generally support Democratic candidates who are in favor of abortion rights, O'Malley said, "I think that, at times, it borders on scandal as far as I'm concerned."

"However, when I challenge people about this, they say, 'Well, bishop, we're not supporting [abortion rights],' " he said. "I think there's a need for people to very actively dissociate themselves from those unacceptable positions, and I think if they did that, then the party would have to change."

O'Malley urged the Democratic Party to be more open to abortion opponents. "My plea with Democratic leaders is always that they make space for prolife politicians, and I have many prolife Democrats come to me and say that they're not making space for them. I think that that is a very serious problem, particularly in a state like Massachusetts, where it is so heavily Democrat."

Democratic National Committee spokesman Damien LaVera defended the party, which he called "a big tent party," and he pointed out that there are 104 Catholic Democrats currently serving in Congress, including two who are vocal opponents of abortion rights, Senator Robert P. Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania and Representative Tim Ryan of Ohio.


Good for Cardinal O'Malley.

Shame on the Democrats (and that's being extremely diplomatic).

Catholics should not support political candidates or parties that support abortion. It's not that complicated.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, November 16, 2007 at 01:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (23) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, November 10, 2007
Worth Watching: “Is Christianity the Problem?” – Dinesh D’Souza Debates Christopher Hitchens


Watch the debate here: “Is Christianity the Problem?” – Dinesh D’Souza Debates Christopher Hitchens

In case you're not familiar with who they are, you can read about them: Dinesh D’Souza & Christopher Hitchens

From the First Epistle of St. Peter:

Finally, all of you, have unity of spirit, sympathy, love of the brethren, a tender heart and a humble mind.
Do not return evil for evil or reviling for reviling; but on the contrary bless, for to this you have been called, that you may obtain a blessing.

For "He that would love life and see good days, let him keep his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking guile; let him turn away from evil and do right; let him seek peace and pursue it. For the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, and his ears are open to their prayer. But the face of the Lord is against those that do evil."

Now who is there to harm you if you are zealous for what is right?

But even if you do suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no fear of them, nor be troubled, but in your hearts reverence Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you, yet do it with gentleness and reverence; and keep your conscience clear, so that, when you are abused, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.

For it is better to suffer for doing right, if that should be God's will, than for doing wrong.

For Christ also died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit; in which he went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers subject to him. (1 Peter 3:8-22)


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, November 10, 2007 at 09:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, November 09, 2007
What’s Wrong With Rudy Giuliani?


Worth reading: What’s Wrong With Rudy Giuliani?

Why any Catholic would suggest voting for this man is a good idea baffles me.

Any thoughts

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, November 09, 2007 at 03:30 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, November 08, 2007
Why The Homosexual Activist, "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence", Were Given Holy Communion While Dressed In Drag


Here's the story: Why cross-dressing 'sisters' got their Communion

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, November 08, 2007 at 06:31 PM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, November 05, 2007
Courageous Archbishop Speaks Against "Episcopal Rebellion" Against Summorum Pontificum; St. Mary's by the Sea Is Promised the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite (Again)


Cestello Annunciation, by Sandro Botticelli, 1489-90

The Annunciation – a model of obedience given by "our tainted nature's solitary boast":

And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of Galilee, called Nazareth, To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.
And the angel being come in, said unto her: "Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women."

Who having heard, was troubled at his saying, and thought with herself what manner of salutation this should be.

And the angel said to her: "Fear not, Mary, for thou hast found grace with God. Behold thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and shalt bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name Jesus. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the most High; and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of David his father; and he shall reign in the house of Jacob for ever. And of his kingdom there shall be no end."

And Mary said to the angel: "How shall this be done, because I know not man?"

And the angel answering, said to her: "The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the most High shall overshadow thee. And therefore also the Holy which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. And behold thy cousin Elizabeth, she also hath conceived a son in her old age; and this is the sixth month with her that is called barren: Because no word shall be impossible with God."

And Mary said: "Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it done to me according to thy word." (Luke 1:26-38)


How wonderful it would be if all Catholic bishops and cardinals exhibited the kind of obedience demonstrated by the Holy Mother of God!

Yet, sadly, some do not obey...

From Rorate Caeli: Secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship, Archbishop Malcolm Ranjith Patabendige, speaks: Episcopal "rebellion" going on; "Bishops and Cardinals" must obey the Pope

Speaking of Summorum Pontificum, the weekly bulletin for St. Mary's by the Sea parish in Huntington Beach announced that the motu proprio will finally be implemented at St. Mary's beginning on the first Sunday of Advent.

Of course, that's much later than the September 14, 2007 deadline given by Pope Benedict XVI, but apparently, change can sometimes be difficult for progressive bishops.

We should also remember that back in August, Bishop Tod Brown forced Fr. Martin Tran to retract the statement made in the July 22, 2007 parish bulletin that Bishop Brown had made Fr. Tran the pastor of St. Mary's by the Sea. Apparently, Bishop Brown had made Fr. Tran the pastor, but then changed his mind.

You may recall that Bishop Brown's decision prompted this post: The Games People Play: Is Bishop Tod Brown Banning The Tridentine Mass At St. Mary's – Again?

So, although it is good to hear a date (however late) has finally been set to finally begin obeying the Holy Father, Catholics in the Diocese of Orange should bear in mind that Bishop Tod Brown has demonstrated in the past that he will not hesitate to demand retractions of promises made in the St. Mary's by the Sea bulletin regarding the date of the implementation of Summorum Pontificum, regardless of the express wishes of the Holy Father.

It's interesting how some people demand obedience from those they have been called to serve, but don't model the obedience they expect from the faithful with respect to their directives, especially when celebrating the liturgy or following the explicit directives of the Holy Father.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, November 05, 2007 at 06:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)
Huckabee vs. Thompson On Abortion & Gay Marriage


Mike Huckabee went after Fred Thompson for Thompson's declaration on "Meet The Press" that he is pro-life, while adding that he doesn't support the Human Life Amendment.

Thompson makes some good points here, and I do see that incrementalism may be the way we need to go with respect to abortion. I'm not so sure that's the way to go with efforts to gain legal recognition for homosexual unions, but I can see why some say its the way to go.

I completely agree with Thompson's assessment of Huckabee.

What I need to hear more of from Fred Thompson is how he is a more conservative (and consequently, better) choice than Giuliani and Romney on these issues. I need to hear that his way is different, but faithful to conservative principles, and that it will not ultimately lead to undermining what social conservatives have fought so hard to accomplish.

I want reassurance that his goals are the same, even if his methods are different, that his methods are something that I can support in good conscience, and that they won't undermine the cause of social conservatism at all.

I realize that Roe vs. Wade hasn't yet been overturned, but we are as close as we are because of social conservatives voting in Republican promises who have (more or less) kept their promise to appoint Supreme Court justices who will not interpret the U.S. Constitution in ways that it was never intended to be interpreted and thereby usurp authority by legislating from the judicial bench.

Those who try to say Republicans haven't delivered for pro-lifers are fudging the facts a bit, and this is not the time to abandon the party that has brought social conservatives this far.

I guess the question social conservatives have for Fred Thompson is: Will the Republican party now abandon us?

The fact that a pro-abortion, pro-homosexual union, (and I would add, gun-grabbing) candidate like Giuliani has a shot at heading the ticket and the party is not a good sign. We need to know Fred is not going in Giuliani's direction, but rather, that he wants to steer us back in Ronald Reagan's direction.

So there it is, Mr. Thompson. That's what we need to know...

How are you the more conservative, different, and better Republican candidate?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, November 05, 2007 at 01:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)
400,000 Anglicans Ask To Join The Catholic Church En Masse – Homosexuality Is The Flash Point


The Delivery of the Keys (detail), by Pietro Perugino, 1481–2, fresco, the Sistine Chapel, Rome.

This can't make "progressive" Catholic prelates like Tod Brown and Roger Mahony happy!

Here's the story: Traditionally Christian Anglicans Ask to Join Catholic Church En Masse

Here's a quote:

The splits in the Worldwide Anglican Communion over the church’s secularising trends and growing enthusiasm for homosexuality has led some to seek reunion with the Catholic Church after nearly 500 years apart. The bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC)are reported to have met in Plenary Session in Portsmouth, England, in the first week of October 2007 and “unanimously agreed” to send a letter to the Pope seeking full, corporate, sacramental union” with the Catholic Church. The group has agreed not to give interviews until the Vatican has responded to their request. The TAC boasts of some 400,000 members worldwide with at least 100 parishes in the US. It has been estimated that the TAC could have as many as 500 parishes supporting its goals in the UK. TAC has been seeking for some years to establish some agreement with Rome that would see the entire body into the Catholic Church. In 2005, shortly after the election of Pope Benedict XVI, the head of the TAC, Archbishop John Hepworth of Adelaide, Australia, said, “We are looking at a church which would retain an Anglican liturgy, Anglican spirituality and a married clergy.” The TAC has retained a positive relationship with Pope Benedict since, as Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, he was head of the Vatican’s doctrinal office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In related news, a group of traditionally minded members of the Church of England has warned Dr. Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, that they would continue to resist the slide of the church towards secularisation. The group, called Reform, said that dozens of Anglican parishes in Britain will start ordaining their own clergy in defiance of their bishops who are overwhelmingly in favour of normalising homosexuality in the church.
My thoughts:

This is good news. It's also a wake-up call to deluded Catholics who want to follow the same disastrous course as the Anglicans and reject authentic Christian doctrine, rooted in Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture, on matters such as sexual morality (especially in regard to homosexual activity) and the ordination of women.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, November 05, 2007 at 09:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, November 04, 2007
Fred Thompson Discussing Abortion On Meet The Press


Thompson says he is pro-life but doesn't support the Human Life Amendment.

I'm not happy with his answers. Not at all.

First: If a person isn't certain whether or not abortion involves destroying a human life, they can't act, since doing so means being willing to take a human life.

Second: Although conservatives, as a rule, oppose expanding federal power and favor allowing state and local government greater autonomy, it is clear from both the Declaration of Independence intended that the federal government promote life, and the United States Constitution that the founding fathers intended that the federal government should promote the general welfare. The right to life and safeguarding the institution of marriage (which is the fundamental building block of society) fall under the categories of life and the promotion of the general welfare. Therefore, it is in keeping with conservative principles to support Constitutional amendments regarding the right to life and safeguarding marriage.

How is the end result of Fred Thompson's vision substantially different from that of Rudy Giuliani with respect to the pro-life position?

I don't see how Thompson can attract pro-life voters to himself if his position (or at least the end result of his position) isn't substantially different from Giuliani's, especially given that Giuliani is the front runner in the polls at the present time.

Thompson, if he wants to appeal to voters, needs to demonstrate that he is different from the other candidates and a more appealing choice than the other candidates.

If the end result of his promised policies is essentially the same as the end result of the policies promised by other candidates, then I don't see how he can gain votes, especially if other candidates are perceived as having a better chance of winning in the primaries and/or the general election.

As I see it, the whole reason many people wanted Fred was because the other Republican candidates were not seen as conservative enough, especially in the area of social conservatism.

Republicans and libertarians who are not socially conservative may not like the fact that social conservatives care about issues like abortion and protecting marriage, but there aren't enough of them to win an election without social conservatives – not by a long shot.

I realize many RINOs and libertarians are excited about the possibility of marginalizing social conservatives and/or forcing them to compromise their values, but the results of their shortsighted efforts in that regard will be the undoing of the Republican party.

Many social conservatives will not vote for a candidate they perceive will essentially be no better than the Democrats in terms of the future outlook for issues of importance to social conservatives.

Preserving the institution of marriage as a union between one man and one woman is essential to society. One has only to look at the problems that have arisen due to single parent families (whether due to divorce or children conceived and born to parents outside of marriage) to see how essential stable two-parent families with a mother and a father (for healthy social adjustment) are for society. One has only to look at the state of marriage, families, and society in permissive cultures that have redefined marriage to see what will happen if the United States does the same thing here.

In so far as abortion: elective abortion is murder.

I realize that many people are desensitized to this and therefore feel comfortable fantasizing that it's appropriate to put the issue on the back burner by lumping abortion with other issues instead of realizing that elective abortion violates a fundamental human right – the right to life – without which, other rights cannot be enjoyed at all, but they need to realize it.

They need to recognize that a candidates who supports legal, elective abortion (for whatever reasons or circumstances that candidate offers as acceptable), or one who is indifferent to ending the practice of legal, elective abortion, is morally defective.

If a candidate supported safe, legal rape, or was indifferent to keeping rape illegal, nobody would suggest voting for them, no matter how promising their other ideas sounded.

The fact that people tolerate candidates supporting legal, elective abortion (for whatever reasons or circumstances that candidate offers as acceptable), or one who is indifferent to ending the practice of legal, elective abortion demonstrates how desensitized and obtuse people in our culture have become.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, November 04, 2007 at 08:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, November 02, 2007
Ann Coulter On Dennis Prager's Radio Show


Dennis talks with Ann about how she defends herself against charges of anti-Semitism and a host of other issues.

Click here to listen: Ann Coulter On Dennis Prager's Radio Show

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, November 02, 2007 at 08:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, November 01, 2007
Spiritual Wisdom
How To Be Miserable
(Guaranteed to be 100% Effective)

Think about yourself!
Use "I" as much as possible!
Mirror yourself continually in the opinion of others!
Listen greedily to what people say about you!
Expect to be appreciated!
Be on the lookout for a good time for yourself!
Shirk your duties, if you can!
Do as little as possible for others!
Love yourself supremely!
Be selfish!

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, November 01, 2007 at 12:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Pro-Abortion Liberal, Alan Colmes, Is Offended By Christians Who Believe That Christianity Is The Truth


It's always interesting to hear a lecture on authentic Christianity from people who support legal, elective abortion and claim that choosing abortion is a fundamental human right.

Alan Colmes' statements here are an example of the slippery slope created by the dictatorship of relativism and religious indifferentism.

Mr. Colmes also quoted the New Testament out of context and even added some of his own words to the words of Christ (when he said, "not the rude and arrogant") during his failed attempt to embarrass Ann Coulter.

Here's the actual text Alan Colmes referenced:

"Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them. For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:17-20)
I wonder what Alan Colmes would think of the Gospel texts quoted after the jump?

Continue reading "Pro-Abortion Liberal, Alan Colmes, Is Offended By Christians Who Believe That Christianity Is The Truth" »

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, October 31, 2007 at 10:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Heresy At St. Mary's by the Sea Parish


Fresco of the "Deeds of the Antichrist" (detail) by Luca Signorelli (c.1501) in the in Orvieto Cathedral, in Italy.

Fr. Martin Tran has been away from St. Mary's by the Sea in Huntington Beach on an extended trip to Vietnam. In his absence, other priests have been filling in at St. Mary's by the Sea, including Fr. Christian Mondor, O.F.M., of Sts. Simon & Jude Catholic Church, the parish nearest St. Mary's by the Sea. Sts. Simon & Jude parish in Huntington Beach is one of the most progressive parishes in the Diocese of Orange.

During Fr. Daniel Johnson's time as pastor of St. Mary's by the Sea, Fr. Johnson never criticized the priests or parishioners of Sts. Simon & Jude, and his employees were not allowed to be critical of that parish or any other parish in the Diocese of Orange. Fr. Johnson was extremely charitable about such things and strongly discouraged any attempt to denigrate Sts. Simon & Jude.

There was a lot to complain about. Sts. Simon & Jude Catholic Church does not have kneelers, and hasn't had any for more than thirty years. Aside from the lack of kneelers and the fact that the congregation remains standing through the entire Eucharistic Prayer (including the Consecration of the Sacred Species), the parish was (and still is) rife with liturgical innovations. Here is a litany of some of the things observed by faithful Catholics at Sts. Simon and Jude over the years: Sunday evening Mass on the lawn on the other side of the parking lot, changing the words of liturgical prayers formulated by the Church, substituting readings (not necessarily from Sacred Scripture), using non-approved texts for liturgical prayers and Mass readings, liturgical dance during the Mass, skits during Mass – some of which involved clowns, homilies or "reflections" by lay people in the place of a homily by a priest or deacon, rock music at Mass – even using the rock song "Gloria" by Them (written by Van Morrison) in the place of the traditional Gloria, and singing songs like Pray by M.C. Hammer, "Higher Love" by Steve Winwood, and "Imagine" by John Lennon all during the context of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, using Protestant praise music such as "Awesome God" by Rich Mullins (with elaborate hand gestures made by the entire congregation during the song), and using illicit (and possibly invalid) matter for the Hosts during Mass (including leavened bread, and bread that included sweeteners such as honey and flavorings, such as cinnamon).

Parishioners at Sts. Simon & Jude parish have (in the past, when the concept was a liturgical fad among heterodox liturgists) been discouraged from kneeling in prayer after receiving Holy Communion. They were told to return to their pews and stand and "face the community".

Catholics have also heard erroneous teaching from the priests at Sts. Simon & Jude, from the pulpit and in the bulletin. I have personally heard Fr. Christian Mondor say, during a homily, that Scriture indicates that Jesus did not know all things because of the passage where Jesus speaks of the end of the world and the General Judgment, saying, "But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone." (Matthew 24:36). Fr. Alex Manville, O.F.M. the former pastor once wrote in the parish bulletin that a statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary without Jesus is "bad theology"). I personally witnessed Fr. Gus Krumm, O.F.M. throw an unconsecrated, large host on the floor during one of his homilies for shock value and to prove a point. I saw another priest put a bag of garbage on the altar during his homily for shock value and to prove a point.

The Nicene Creed was frequently omitted, and when I asked Fr. Gus Krumm why this happened, he told me that if you eat corn flakes for breakfast every day, it gets old and stale real fast.

So, upon reading all of these things (and I could have mentioned many, many more), I will share with you the wisdom imparted by Fr. Christian Mondor during a recent homily at St. Mary's by the Sea.

Fr. Christian sought to illustrate why Catholics who continue to kneel during certain parts of the Mass are in error.

The sections below were sent to me by a parishioner of St. Mary's by the Sea and are essentially recollections of what was said, but not a transcription:

1. The reason why the Church is moving in the direction of standing instead of kneeling is to show our identification with the people of God - this has been what Vatican II has brought to our Church. 2. We do this in obedience to our pastors and bishops.
3. Of course the church does not prevent those who kneel from doing so; while the church is moving toward standing [he never differentiated about WHEN during Mass the standing was that he was talking about].

4. Some time back when Temple [I forgot their name] outgrew their temple, and were searching for a place to hold their service, we said that since we didn't have anything on Saturday evening, other than afternoon weddings, they could use our church. They were so grateful. So we cover up our statues and the cross on Saturday evening for their service. When I went to one of their services I noticed that they mostly stood at their service - it was so good to see that we [the Catholic Church] have borrowed so many liturgical practices from Jewish customs - - such as standing.

5. All this was supposed to relate to Luke's gospel reading today about Jesus being accused of healing the woman in the synagogue on the sabbath. "When I think of this reading I'm reminded of the people at Temple [so-and-so] and the fact that they outgrew their small temple . . ." This is the context in which he brought up kneeling versus standing.


Rather than write a lengthy criticism of Fr. Christian Mondor, who is a very nice priest (and a surfer) in his late seventies or early eighties, I will link the section on kneeling in Pope Benedict XVI's book, The Spirit of the Liturgy: The Theology of Kneeling

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, October 30, 2007 at 10:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (22) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Saint Padre Pio Has Been Smeared In A New Book


This is the London Telegraph's "objective" headline: Italy's Padre Pio 'faked his stigmata with acid'

Here's a quote:

Padre Pio, Italy's most-loved saint, faked his stigmata by pouring carbolic acid on his hands, according to a new book.
The Other Christ: Padre Pio and 19th Century Italy, by the historian Sergio Luzzatto, draws on a document found in the Vatican's archive.

Padre Pio exhibited stigmata throughout his life, starting in 1911
The document reveals the testimony of a pharmacist who said that the young Padre Pio bought four grams of carbolic acid in 1919.

"I was an admirer of Padre Pio and I met him for the first time on 31 July 1919," wrote Maria De Vito.

She claimed to have spent a month with the priest in the southern town of San Giovanni Rotondo, seeing him often.

"Padre Pio called me to him in complete secrecy and telling me not to tell his fellow brothers, he gave me personally an empty bottle, and asked if I would act as a chauffeur to transport it back from Foggia to San Giovanni Rotondo with four grams of pure carbolic acid.

"He explained that the acid was for disinfecting syringes for injections. He also asked for other things, such as Valda pastilles."

The testimony was originally presented to the Vatican by the Archbishop of Manfredonia, Pasquale Gagliardi, as proof that Padre Pio caused his own stigmata with acid.

It was examined by the Holy See during the beatification process of Padre Pio and apparently dismissed.


I knew London and Europe were Godless, but I'm still disappointed to see how desperate they are to justify their abandonment of Christian values and reckless pursuit of the ephemeral pleasures of this life without any thought about how those pleasures came to exist (as though they can be had apart from God or could even exist without God). People seem to think that God's gifts can be enjoyed without advertence to their nature. They ignore the fact that violating the natural law by using any being in a manner inconsistent with its nature harms the user (and often the person or thing being used improperly). They simply pursue every perceived good as though it was due to them by divine right and genuinely seem to believe themselves to be the true arbiters of the nature of good and evil, which (for them) always conveniently coincides with whatever most pleases them at any given moment, regardless of inconsistencies in their logic. They often don't care if they hurt other people, and they'll tolerate evils like abortion for expediency's sake, but are the first to complain of any perceived injustice, and they'll still deny any talk of an objective moral law with a straight face right after complaining that something isn't fair or just (as though such concepts could exist without a standard with which to measure the justice or fairness of a thing).

The only thing that stands in the way of their insane delusions about the nature of reality is the sound human philosophy and divinely revealed Theology contained within Catholic teaching. The Catholic faith is a genuine threat to such people, and they will not rest until they convince themselves and as many other people as possible that they are not living evil lives. It is a sad state of affairs when the only way to make yourself look good is by trying to make others look worse than you are, and that is the motive of lies like this.

They way around these lies is to point to the myriad of other miracles and mystical phenomena within the Church. Let's see them explain the Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano, the incorrupt bodies of the saints, the miraculous cures attributed to the intercession of those who have been canonized and beatified, the liquefaction of the blood of St. Januarius, the Miracle of the Sun at Fatima, the miraculous cures at Lourdes, or even the fact that the Catholic Church has outlasted every human institution in all of recorded history, including those that began before the Church was founded. Let them try and explain away the fact that the apostles were martyred for their proclamation of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ, which they, in an effort to salve their consciences, have to pretend to have been a hoax. Would you let people kill you to perpetuate belief in something you absolutely knew for a fact to be a lie? Before anyone tries to say so, that's not the same thing as being a suicide bomber for the glory of Islam. Such people may genuinely (albeit erroneously) believe their convictions to be true, but they did not invent their errors, whereas the apostles would have had to do so, since the articulation of the Resurrection originated with them.

Once the Divinity of Christ is established, it's a small step to establish the infallible authority of the Church He founded, promised to preserve in Truth and promised to remain with until the consummation of the world.

From thence we can move to the infallible authority of St. Padre Pio's canonization and realize that lies like those being spread about St. Padre Pio are another desperate attempt to justify the immoral lifestyles of those who spread them.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, October 23, 2007 at 10:17 PM | Permalink | Comments (47) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, October 20, 2007
The Conversion of St. Augustine, Pornography & Sexual Incontinence


Source credit: John Piper, St. Augustine, and Pornography

Quote from the excellent, St. John's Valdosta Blog:

This is from a sermon by a BAPTIST MINISTER using St. Augustine of Hippo's Confessions as his text. When was the last time you heard a homily at Mass quoting St. Augustine and examining his words? Why have we traded in the riches of the Catholic Church Fathers for trite little ditties like Chicken Soup for the Soul?
If you haven't read The Confessions of St. Augustine, you have missed the opportunity of befriending a holy and wise Catholic saint.

Get the book here: Confessions of Saint Augustine

Take it and read!

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, October 20, 2007 at 02:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Ann Coulter On The O'Reilly Factor


In this segment, Ann discusses The San Francisco Sacrilege, Christianity & Judaism, and politics.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, October 20, 2007 at 03:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, October 16, 2007
St. Louis Archbishop, Raymond Burke, Affirms That Pro-Abortion Politicians Should Be Denied Communion; "Catholics" For A "Free Choice" & Cardinal Theodore McCarrick Are Not Happy About It


St. Louis Archbishop, Raymond Burke has reaffirmed his position that pro-abortion politicians should not receive the Holy Eucharist.

Here's the story: Bishop preaches tough Communion rule

Here's a quote:

St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke, a veteran of clashes between Catholic bishops and politicians, has attempted for years to enlist fellow bishops to deny Holy Communion to wayward politicians. Now, the conservative cleric is invoking the church's highest punishment -- mortal sin -- to persuade the lay and ordained Catholics who distribute Communion at Mass to safeguard the sacrament.
Drawing on the works of the late Italian Jesuit scholar Felice Cappello, Burke says those ministers are "held, under pain of mortal sin, to deny the sacraments to the unworthy."

That argument could place Communion ministers on the frontlines of the "wafer wars" as the 2008 presidential race heats up, and as bishops debate a document on "faithful citizenship."

"It is clear that church discipline places an obligation on the minister of Holy Communion to refuse Holy Communion to persons known, by the public, to be in mortal sin," Burke writes in a new journal article.

Burke lays out his case like a legal brief in Periodica de re Canonica, a journal widely read in seminaries and published by Rome's Pontifical Gregorian University, an elite school for Catholic clergy.

"No matter how often a bishop or priest repeats the teaching of the church regarding procured abortion, if he stands by and does nothing to discipline a Catholic who publicly supports legislation permitting the gravest of injustices, and, at the same time, presents himself to receive Holy Communion, then his teachings ring hollow," Burke writes.

A former top official in the Signatura, the Vatican's high court, and a noted expert in canon law, Burke previously has kicked off public debates over policing the Communion rail. While bishop of La Crosse, Wis., he ordered clergy to refuse to offer the sacrament to certain pro-abortion-rights politicians.

In 2004, Burke and a handful of other bishops said they would refuse Communion to presidential hopeful Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass. Burke also said Catholics who voted for pro-abortion-rights politicians, such as Kerry, should refrain from taking the sacrament until they confessed their "mortal sin."


Archbishop Burke's position is in line with Pope Benedict XVI's comments on the subject as Cardinal Ratzinger.

Yet Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, the former ordinary for Washington D.C., is not happy about Archbishop Burke's statement. (This is probably because Cardinal McCarrick is very close to Senator Edward Kennedy and other key Democrats and he, and other leaders within the Church in the United States, know that denying Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians will primarily harm Democrats and they don't want to hurt their favorite political party.)

"Catholics" For A "Free Choice", a group of dissenting "Catholics" is also unhappy with Archbishop Burke.

Here's that part of the story: Former Catholic Cardinal, Pro-Abortion Group Blast Communion Denial Quote

I wonder what Roger Cardinal Mahony, who opened the 2000 Democratic convention with a prayer (although he did pray for the unborn in that prayer), and who has honored pro-abortion politicians, including Bill Clinton; San Francisco Archbishop, George Niederauer, who refuses to deny Holy Communion to Nancy Pelosi and says he doesn’t know Ms. Pelosi's stance on abortion; Washington D.C. Archbishop, Donald Wuerl, who will also not prevent Nancy Pelosi from receiving Holy Communion; and Orange County Bishop, Tod Brown, who has given Holy Communion to pro-abortion Democratic Representative, Loretta Sanchez, and is reportedly on excellent terms with Ms. Sanchez, think about all of this.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, October 16, 2007 at 10:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (23) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, October 15, 2007
Jungle Boogie: The Bishop of the Diocese of San Bernardino Goes Native


Source: Catholic Church Conservation

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, October 15, 2007 at 05:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (24) | TrackBack (0)
The Homosexual Agenda & The U.S. Catholic Bishops, Plus: More On The San Francisco Sacrilege & The Priest Suspended By The Vatican For Admission Of Homosexual Behavior


There appears to be no end in sight to the scourge of homosexuality within the Catholic Church in the priesthood and in the hierarchy. When will the Holy See extricate the Church from the homosexual death grip that has enthralled so many Catholics, including priests, religious, and bishops?

A New Pastoral Letter & John Jay Report?

Randy Engel's latest article is worth reading: Gay agenda sways Catholic bishops

Here's a brief quote to give you as sense of what the (much longer) article is about:

Urge your bishop to vote “NO” on “Ministry to Persons With a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care” and Vote “NO” on the new John Jay Study on Clerical Sexual Abuse.
The vote will take place at the November 13-16, 2006 fall meeting of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) to be held at the Baltimore Marriott Waterfront, 700 Aliceanna Street, Baltimore, MD 21202. Letters, phone calls and faxes urging a “NO” vote on these two important agenda items are needed both before your bishop leaves his diocese for Baltimore and after he arrives at the hotel.


San Francisco Sacrilege Updates

San Francisco Archbishop, George Niederauer, has apologized for giving the Most Holy Eucharist to militant homosexuals dressed in mock religious garb and "drag queen" make-up: Statement released Oct. 11 by Archdiocese of San Francisco regarding archbishop giving communion to two “Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence”

The bishops' spokesman had already offered this statement about the issue before Niederauer apologized: “I did not see any mock religious garb”; Spokesman says San Francisco archbishop “simply making a pastoral visit” when he gave communion to men dressed as nuns

The reasons I'm not buying what Archbishop Niederauer and his spokesman are selling are found in this post: Bill O'Reilly Didn't Do His Homework When Reporting On The San Francisco Sacrilege


California Catholic Daily also reports that Most Holy Redeemer Parish and "The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" remain unrepentant: “It allows me to live the life of Christ in fabulous make up and heels"; No mea culpas at Most Holy Redeemer: parish publishes thank-you note from member of group condemned in archbishop’s apology

Vatican Suspends Monsignor For "Anonymous" Televised Admission Of Homosexual Activity The Saga Continues...

An on-line version of the Italian television broadcast, “Exit” segment, that exposed Mosignor Tommaso Stenico, Capo Ufficio in the Congregation for the Clergy and Professor at the Pontifical Lateranian University, can be found here: Chiesa ed omosessualità

Rorate Caeli offers excellent insight into the problem here: Shame and shamelessness

Quote:

Now, this shameless man has the gall to tell Italian religious news website Petrus that he was actually willing "to write a book, a research [paper] on the problem of homosexuality among priests". Right... That is probaby why Stenico ended his date with the words, "If you wish, call me or send me a [text] message. How good you are. [Quanto sei bono.]".
It is unavoidable to conclude that the Vatican is infested with active homosexuals - who are only suspended from their functions when they are arrested with transsexual male prostitutes (as it happened to Monsignor Cesare Burgazzi (C.B.), a high officer in the Secretariat of State, last year), or found looking at homosexual pornography websites (as it happened to three priests last year, including one who said "to everyone that he fell in disgrace only due to the jealosy of those for whom he had shown no interest"), or shown in national television as they bring their dates to their Vatican offices, as it happened to Monsignor Stenico.

What now?


Abbey-Roads has this commentary on the situation: Boys in the Vatican

John Allen, a senior correspondent in Rome who writes for the progressive, National Catholic Reporter, tends to do a fair job with reporting the facts, despite the heterodox agenda of the NCR.

He offers some details about the defense offered by the suspended priest for his behavior here: Vatican official suspended after hidden camera report on gay priests

The text of Allen's report and analysis is after the jump...

Continue reading "The Homosexual Agenda & The U.S. Catholic Bishops, Plus: More On The San Francisco Sacrilege & The Priest Suspended By The Vatican For Admission Of Homosexual Behavior" »

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, October 15, 2007 at 08:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, October 12, 2007
The Latest Lame Excuse For Liberals To Be Angry With Ann Coulter


Ann Coulter said Jews need to be perfected by becoming Christians. Of course, this sent the liberals over at MediaMatters into frothy lather and they very likely almost fell over themselves in their frenzy to put up video and denounce Ann.

News flash: Christians are supposed to believe all people ideally should be Christians.

Why is it now wrong to say that Christians believe their religion is the truth and that religions which oppose and/or contradict Christianity are not true, or at best, as Ann put it: less perfect?

Religious indifferentism is an error. This Catholic Encyclopedia article explains why: Religious Indifferentism

Here's the story: Columnist Ann Coulter Shocks Cable TV Show, Declaring 'Jews Need to Be Perfected by Becoming Christians'

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, October 12, 2007 at 02:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Video: Catholic Archbishop George Niederauer Gives Communion to Blasphemous "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence"


You can see the video at Quamdiu Domine by clicking this link: Most Holy Redeemer (MHR) Parish in San Francisco

Gerald of The Cafeteria Is Closed posts about it here: Video of Niederauer

California Catholic Daily has an article here: "Queer nuns” get Communion

The Curt Jester posts about it here: Communion For The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence


Below: Most Holy Redeemer Church - BeBe Sweetbriar: Miss July and Miss Desperate Diva 2008


See also: Catholic Archbishop George Niederauer Gives Communion to Blasphemous "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence"

and

The "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" Lead "Revival Bingo"

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, October 10, 2007 at 12:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Catholic Archbishop George Niederauer Gives Communion to Blasphemous "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence"




Here's the story: More San Francisco Nuttiness: Catholic Archbishop George Niederauer Gives Communion to Blasphemous ‘Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence’

Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church website also shows pictures of the event, but the site does not include images of the homosexual activist "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" or Archbishop Niederauer giving them Holy Communion.

Here's the link to their site: Thank You , Archbishop Niederauer!

My thoughts:

There is absolutely no excuse for allowing homosexual activist men dressed as women who are known for their public advocacy of the homosexual "lifestyle" to receive Holy Communion. Archbishop Niederauer has betrayed his vocation in doing so.

I'm aware that the excuse will be that Christ dined with sinners and that the Son of Man came to heal sinners.

Nice try.

Our Lord told people to repent. He told the woman caught in adultery to "sin no more". He didn't invite unrepentant, sacrilegious "drag queens" who are proud to have the world know they love to do shameful things with their bodies to the Last Supper in order to receive Him the Most Holy Eucharist.

The excuse that the Archbishop didn't know who the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" are won't work either. He knew enough to allow his archdiocese to cancel their use of Church property for "revival bingo" (but only after the scandal was made widely known on the internet – before that, they'd been doing revival bingo for a long time, even before doing it at the Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church parish hall, and their activities were not a secret).

For another example of what "The Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" advocate, see: The "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" Lead "Revival Bingo"

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, October 09, 2007 at 03:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (77) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, October 02, 2007
A Post On Many Things


Why St. Thérèse of Lisieux became the youngest 'doctor' of Church

Indian priest says his cure was miracle through Mother Teresa

Rugby star: Padre Pio healed me

Abortion supporters disrupt Mass at Cathedral of Managua, attempt to receive Communion

Archbishop closes convent after nuns come to blows; Sisters had 'clearly lost their religious vocation'


Longtime chief Vatican liturgist replaced; Piero Marini was secretary to Vatican II liturgy chief

Bishops agree to emergency contraception

General Pace Repeats View That Gay Sex Immoral

School district considers banning traditions seen as offensive to Muslims

This is why we need a solidly conservative Republican President in 2008 & 2012: Too-Close To Call Upcoming Supreme Court Cases

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, October 02, 2007 at 12:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, September 15, 2007
Responses To Certain Questions Of The United States Conference Of Catholic Bishops Concerning Artificial Nutrition And Hydration


Bishop Robert Lynch of St. Petersburg, Florida wasn't much help to the Schiavo family when they sought to prevent her husband from ordering her to be killed by starvation and the denial of hydration: Terri Schiavo's Brother Rebukes Bishop Lynch

Yesterday, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith released a brief document titled, Responses To Certain Questions Of The United States Conference Of Catholic Bishops Concerning Artificial Nutrition And Hydration.

The text of the document and its commentary is available at Rorate Caeli: The "Terri Schiavo Responses"

The text of Responses To Certain Questions Of The United States Conference Of Catholic Bishops Concerning Artificial Nutrition And Hydration is also available after the jump.

Continue reading "Responses To Certain Questions Of The United States Conference Of Catholic Bishops Concerning Artificial Nutrition And Hydration" »

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, September 15, 2007 at 11:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, August 30, 2007
Jesus Was Not A Liberal


Casting Out The Money Changers by Carl Heinrich Bloch (May 23, 1834 – February 22, 1890)

I have noticed that, from time to time, liberals attempt to claim that Jesus was a liberal. I think the claim stems from the notion that Jesus was "anti-establishment" (which isn't entirely true), that Jesus preached about forgiveness and encouraged leniency (primarily because of the severity of the punishments meted out during His public ministry, not because He didn't believe in punishment; he mentioned the reality of the threat of hell far more often than He spoke of heaven), His concern for the poor, and His teaching that we would be judged on whether or not we practiced the corporal works of mercy (To feed the hungry; To give drink to the thirsty; To clothe the naked; To shelter the homeless; To visit the sick; To visit the imprisoned; To bury the dead).

The Catholic Encyclopedia says the following in its article on the Corporal and Spiritual Works of Mercy:

Continue reading "Jesus Was Not A Liberal" »

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, August 30, 2007 at 08:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (21) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, August 28, 2007
It's Time To Speak The Truth: Bad Catholic Bishops Exist, And Their Efforts Need To Be Opposed


The Kiss of Judas by Gustave Doré (January 6, 1832 – January 23, 1883)

Summorum Pontificum plainly states that starting September 14, 2007, the Extraordinary Form of the Latin Rite (Tridentine Mass or Traditional Latin Mass) is to be made available to the faithful in their parishes if they ask for it. Bishop Brown has prevented this from taking place, which is not obedient to the Holy Father's express directive.

The pastor, not the bishop, is the one to grant such requests and permission from the bishop is not required.

However, Bishop Brown has seen to it that St. Mary's by the Sea has no pastor, which gives him more leverage.

Continue reading "It's Time To Speak The Truth: Bad Catholic Bishops Exist, And Their Efforts Need To Be Opposed" »

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, August 28, 2007 at 08:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (23) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, August 26, 2007
Don't Mess Around With Bishop Brown!
In the light of "The Games People Play: Is Bishop Tod Brown Banning The Tridentine Mass At St. Mary's – Again?", here are three more songs inspired by Bishop Brown's involvement in recent events at St. Mary's by the Sea.

Don't mess with Tod...

Killer Queen by Queen


The consequences aren't pretty...

Another One Bites The Dust by Queen


Let's put things another way using the language of diversity, with which Bishop Brown is so fluent...

No More Tears (Enough Is Enough) by Barbra Streisand & Donna Summer



Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, August 26, 2007 at 02:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
The Games People Play: Is Bishop Tod Brown Banning The Tridentine Mass At St. Mary's – Again?


Bishop Brown is at it again; playing games with the Tridentine Mass at St. Mary's by the Sea.

When the late Fr. Daniel Johnson retired, Bishop Tod Brown took the opportunity to squash the celebration of the Tridentine Mass: The End of the Mass at St. Mary's?

Bishop Brown ignored thousands of signatures on a petition to keep the Traditional Latin Mass at St. Mary's by the Sea, as well as hundreds of letters asking for the preservation of the 12:00 PM Sunday Tridentine Mass at St. Mary's by the Sea.

Although some people knew better, many never suspected this was only the beginning of Bishop Brown's micromanagement of this small little parish...

About five parishes in the Diocese of Orange do not have kneelers. Most Catholics don't kneel during any part of the Mass in those parishes, but Bishop Tod Brown has never shown much concern about this. However, when about half of the parishioners at St. Mary's by the Sea continued to kneel after the Angus Dei, despite Bishop Brown's novel liturgical directive that Catholics will stand after the Agnus Dei in the Diocese of Orange (while Catholics throughout most of America continue to kneel at that time, with the approval of their bishops), Bishop Brown directed the parish administrator, Fr. Martin Tran, to stop Catholics who continued to show reverence for the Real Presence of Christ in the Holy Eucharist by continuing to kneel at that time (as most Catholics throughout America have done since the early 1970's and most continue to do).

The controversy made headlines:

A Ban on Kneeling? Some Catholics Won’t Stand for It, Los Angeles Times, May 28, 2006
The Kneeling Controversy At St. Mary's by the Sea Parish
The Diocese Of Orange Clarifies

During Bishop Tod Brown's time in Orange County, a number of liturgical abuses, as well as a number of actions and teachings of questionable orthodoxy have been tolerated, as can be seen at these links:

Open Letter to Tod Brown, Bishop of Orange
Why Does Bishop Tod Brown Support Rod Stephens?
Vocations director under fire in California
Now On YouTube: Bishop Tod Brown Refuses To Give Holy Communion To A Kneeling Woman
Bishop Tod Brown: More Defiance In Orange County?
The Blasphemous Halloween Masses: More Footage Even More Footage: Catholic Halloween Mass
Halloween Mass 3 - The Barney Blessing

Meanwhile, the Tridentine Mass continued to be suppressed at St. Mary's by the Sea parish: Bishop Brown's Empire Strikes Back: No Tridentine For You!

Then, after Summorum Pontificum, the Tridentine Mass was promised to parishioners of St. Mary's by the Sea. You can view that bulletin here: Tridentine Mass Promised

Masses were set to begin in time to meet the requirement of Pope Benedict XVI that Summorum Pontificum be implemented by September 14, 2007:

We order that everything We have established with these apostolic letters issued as "motu proprio" be considered as "established and decreed," and to be observed from Sept. 14 of this year, feast of the Exaltation of the Cross, whatever there may be to the contrary.
However, Bishop Brown made it clear that there was a "catch": Bishop Tod Brown's New Requirement: The Traditional Latin Mass At St. Mary's By The Sea Is Only For St. Mary's Parishioners

While continuing to do little to change the liturgical aberrations in other parishes or strengthen orthodox teaching in the Diocese of Orange, Bishop Tod Brown continues his extraordinary interest in the affairs at St. Mary's by the Sea with an interest unlike any he has shown for the other parishes in the diocese.

Here's how:

Several weeks ago, Fr. Martin Tran announced that he has been made the pastor at St. Mary's by the Sea. You can view that bulletin here: Fr. Martin Tran, Pastor

This was good news, in the sense that pastors have special canonical rights and parishes with pastors have a better chance at longevity.

This weekend, Fr. Tran announced that he is not the pastor at St. Mary's by the Sea, but continues to serve as parish administrator.

A few weeks ago, Fr. Tran announced that St. Mary’s by the Sea would have a Vietnamese Mass. You can view that bulletin here: Mass in Vietnamese

Many people speculate that Fr. Tran had hoped to bring in a lot of Vietnamese parishioners (and donors) which would have helped the parish, which has been hurting financially ever since Bishop Brown began stripping away the elements that made St. Mary's by the Sea a traditional haven. Attendance is down, by eyeball more than by count, approximately 50-60% on an average Sunday and collections are horrific. Fr. Tran recently announced the possibility of closing St. Mary's due to the reduced cash flow. You can view that bulletin here: We Need Money

The restoration of the Tridentine Mass and the addition of a Vietnamese Mass would have likely been like a shot in the arm (and the collection basket). However, this week, Fr. Tran announced there would not be a Vietnamese Mass - in December, or ever. He also announced that the Tridentine mass would not start on September 14th, as promised (and required by Summorum Pontificum).

Here is the exact text of Fr. Tran's message in this week's bulletin:

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
Before I leave for Vietnam, I would like to make some corrections:

1) Assignment: I continue to serve St. Mary's by the Sea as Administrator.

2) There will be no changes for the Masses here when I am away: we will continue to have the Latin Mass (Novus Ordo) at 12:00 Noon/Sunday until I come back from Vietnam. I will work further with Bishop Brown for the implementation of the Tridentine Mass.

3) There will be no Mass in Vietnamese starting in December or in the future. I am so sorry about all of this! Please be patient, keep the parish running and focus on praying for my mission in Vietnam! I will have lots of stories to tell when I come back from Vietnam at the end of October.

May God bless all of you!

Your servant/brother in Christ, Fr. Martin


I would like to dedicate the following songs to Bishop Tod Brown:

Games People Play by Joe South
Whoa – the games people play now. Every night and every day now. Never meanin' what they say now. Never sayin' what they mean.
While they wile away the hours
in their ivory towers,
'till they're covered-up with flowers
in the back of a black limousine.

[Chorus]
La, da, da da, da-da da;
La, da, da da, da-da de...
talkin' 'bout you-n-me
and the games people play--now.

Whoa we make one another cry,
break a heart then we say goodbye;
cross our hearts and we hope to die
that the other was to blame.

But neither one will ever give-in,
so we gaze at an eight-by-ten
thinkin' 'bout the things that might have been
and it's a dirty rotten shame.

People walkin'-up to ya,
singin' glory hallelujah
'n' they're tryin' ta sock it to ya,
in the name of the Lord.

They're gonna teach you how to meditate,
read your horoscope, cheat your faith.
And furthermore to Hell with hate
Come-on and get-on board.

Look-around tell me what you see.
What's a-happenin' to you and me?
God grant me the serenity
to jus' remember who I am.

'cause you've given-up your sanity
for your pride and your vanity,
turn your back on humanity;
Oh and you don't give a da da da da da.


Eye In The Sky by The Alan Parsons Project

Many faithful parishioners at St. Mary's by the Sea have long feared that Bishop Brown wants to close St. Mary's by the Sea and sell the land, which is choice real estate, two blocks from the ocean in downtown Huntington Beach.

Some Catholics breathed a sigh of relief when the Coastal Commission heard of such concerns and made it known that Bishop Brown can't destroy St. Mary's, because the church is a historical building. Truth be told, that doesn't allay my concern.

There have been stories of parishes set to be renovated, but not without opposition, that were mysteriously destroyed or seriously damaged by fires. If something like this were to happen at St. Mary's by the Sea, it would be devastating to many, many people. Including me.

I'm not accusing anyone of anything. I'm just saying that if something like this happens, those who view it as "bad luck" may be fooling themselves.

However it is accomplished, it seems pretty obvious that Bishop Brown does not want St. Mary's by the Sea to thrive. Whatever happens to St. Mary's, traditional Catholicism will survive and it will even thrive.

I just don't understand why Bishop Brown won't leave St. Mary's by the Sea alone.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, August 26, 2007 at 12:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (88) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, August 23, 2007
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.
I had lunch today with a very good of friend of mine, I'll call him "DON." I consider him a good friend because in addition to being a drinking "buddy," he also is a sincere and conservative Catholic.



He had just called into a radio program on Immaculate Heart radio called "Open Line." On Thursdays this program is hosted by Patrick Madrid (pictured above).

The topic was St. Therese of Avila, and her apparition of hell, and how it played in her conversion.



For those not familiar I quote below from her autobiography, Chapter XXXII:

"A long time after the Lord had granted me many of the favours which I have described, together with other very great ones, I was at prayer one day when suddenly, without knowing how, I found myself, as I thought, plunged right into hell. I realized that it was the Lord's will that I should see the place which the devils had prepared for me there and which I had merited for my sins. This happened in the briefest space of time, but, even if I were to live for many years, I believe it would be impossible for me to forget it. The entrance, I thought, resembled a very long, narrow passage, like a furnace, very low, dark and closely confined; the ground seemed to be full of water which looked like filthy, evil-smelling mud, and in it were many wicked-looking reptiles. At the end there was a hollow place scooped out of a wall, like a cupboard, and it was here that I found myself in close confinement. But the sight of all this was pleasant by comparison with what I felt there. What I have said is in no way an exaggeration."

The following statement was made on the radio show -

"Although St. Teresa acknowledges that she had committed no mortal sin, she did acknowledge that she was 'lukewarm' and that she knew that she was destined for hell if she didn't change her ways..."

WOW

Perhaps my ultramontane upbringing was a tad legalistic, but I always thought that the commiting of mortal sin was the way one got into hell, and that absent that - we might have to suffer Purgatory (nothing to be taken lightly in itself) but that we would not go to hell.

Given the level of erudition of many of the readers of this blog, I am very interested to get your take on this.

PS - I have immense respect for the work of Patrick Madrid and Immaculate Heart Radio, I'm going to send him an e-mail on this topic and will post his response, should he respond.

Posted by Loyolalaw98 on Thursday, August 23, 2007 at 08:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (17) | TrackBack (0)
The Miraculous Conversion of Alphonse Ratisbonne


Father Marie-Alphonse Ratisbonne & The Miraculous Medal

The conversion of Alphonse Ratisbonne is truly a remarkable and beautiful testimony to the power of the Blessed Virgin Mary, through whom it pleases Our Lord to give all graces to humanity, and well worth reading.

Alphonse Ratisbonne was an agnostic Jew. He was a virulent anti-Catholic as well and blamed the Catholic Church for the suffering of the Jewish people.

Ratisbonne was given a Miraculous Medal as a test by a Catholic friend and asked to pray the Memorare of St. Bernard.

Here is a brief description of the events which caused Alphonse Ratisbonne to agree to wear the Miraculous Medal:

"Since you abhor superstition and espouse such liberal views," he asks Alphonse, "would you consider submitting to a simple test?"
"What test?"

"To wear something I'm going to give you. It's a medal of the Holy Virgin. It appears quite ridiculous to you, no doubt. But as for me, I attach great importance to it." And he shows Alphonse the Miraculous Medal attached to a cord.

Alphonse is dumbstruck. He can scarcely believe the baron's impertinence. But as a man of the world, he doesn't want to seem to be making too much of a trifle. So he consents, breezily quoting a line from The Tales of Hoffman: "If it does me no good, at least it will do me no harm."

This is too much. "Laissons ces sottises!" exclaims Alphonse -- "Let's stop this foolishness!" For the mention of St. Bernard has reminded him of his brother, Abbe' Théodore Ratisbonne, author of a biography of the Cistercian saint. Anything that reminds Alphonse of his traitor-brother arouses his rage. [Note: Théodore Ratisbonne, Alphonse's older brother, had converted to Catholicism]

However, the baron persists. If Alphonse refuses to pray this short prayer, he insists, he'll thereby render the whole "test" null and void. So, Alphonse consents. At the Baron's behest, he even agrees to copy out the Memorare. Then he pockets it and leaves, greatly amused at the entire absurd episode.

But later that night, when he mechanically copies the prayer, something happens. He can't get the words of the Memorare out of his mind. They haunt him, he recounts later, like an annoying tune one can't dislodge from one's head. Over and over again, with mounting irritation, he murmurs this obtrusive prayer of St. Bernard.


Our Lady appeared to Ratisbonne at the church of Sant' Andrea delle Fratte in Rome in 1842. After the vision of Our Lady, Ratisbonne was instantly converted to the Catholic faith.

You can find the whole story here: The Miraculous Conversion of Alphonse Ratisbonne

Learning of Ratisbonne's conversion through this medal was one of the events that inspired St. Maximilian Kolbe to found the Militia Immaculata.

Fr. Alberto Arzilli, OFM Conv., a fellow friar with St. Maximilian, related the story on April 26, 1942:

"Fr. Maximilian . . . was convinced of what he had to do [regarding the founding of the MI] on the [75th] anniversary day of the apparition of Our Lady to Alphonse Ratisbonne, January 20, 1917. The inspiration came to him during the morning meditation conducted by the . . . Father Rector Ignudi. In the meditation Father Ignudi told the story of Ratisbonne's miraculous conversion and commented on it."
"With a face beaming and bubbling with joy at the power of Our Lady shown in the conversion of Ratisbonne, Friar Max spoke to me of his inspiration. Smiling, he told me we had to crush the Devil and all heresies, and especially the error of Masonry."


For background information on the visions of Saint Catherine Labouré and the Miraculous Medal, click here: The Story of Saint Catherine Labouré

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, August 23, 2007 at 09:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, August 15, 2007
Solemnity Of The Assumption - August 15th


The Assumption of the Virgin by Bartolomé Esteban Murillo (December 31, 1617 - April 3, 1682)
Wikipedia has an excellent article on Mary's Assumption here: Assumption of Mary


Tota pulchra es, Maria
et macula originalis non est in te.
Vestimentum tuum candidum quasi nix, et facies tua sicut sol.
Tota pulchra es, Maria,
et macula originalis non est in te.
Tu gloria Jerusalem, tu laetitia Israel, tu honorificentia populi nostri.
Tota pulchra es, Maria.

You are completely pure, Mary,
and the stain of original sin is not within you.
Your clothing is white like snow, and your face is like the sun.
You are completely pure, Mary,
and the stain of original sin is not within you.
You are the glory of Jerusalem, you are the joy of Israel, you are the honoured of our people.
You are completely pure, Mary

Schubert's Ave Maria


Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, August 15, 2007 at 11:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, August 14, 2007
Saint Maximilian Kolbe - Feast Day, August 14th


From Wikipedia:

Saint Maximilian Kolbe (January 8, 1894–August 14, 1941), also known as Maksymilian or Massimiliano Maria Kolbe and "Apostle of Consecration to Mary," born as Rajmund Kolbe, was a Polish Conventual Franciscan friar who volunteered to die in place of a stranger in the Nazi concentration camp of Auschwitz in Poland.
He was canonized by the Catholic Church as Saint Maximilian Kolbe on October 10, 1982 by Pope John Paul II, and declared a martyr of charity. He is the patron saint of drug addicts, political prisoners, families, journalist, amateur radio, prisoners, and the pro-life movement. Pope John Paul II declared him the "The Patron Saint of Our Difficult Century".

Kolbe, the son of a Polish family with partial German origin, was born in 1894 in Zduńska Wola, at that time part of Russian Empire, as the second son of Juliusz Kolbe and Marianna Kolbe (née Dąbrowska). His parents moved to Pabianice, where they worked first as weavers, then ran a bookstore. Later, in 1914, his father joined Józef Piłsudski's Polish Legions and was captured by the Russians for fighting for the independence of a partitioned Poland.

In 1907, Kolbe and his elder brother Franciszek decided to join the Conventual Franciscan Order. They illegally crossed the border between Russia and Austria-Hungary and joined the Conventual Franciscan junior seminary in Lwów. In 1910, Kolbe was allowed to enter the novitiate. He professed his first vows in 1911, adopting the name Maximilian, and the final vows in 1914, in Rome, adopting the names Maximilian Maria, to show his veneration of the Blessed Virgin Mary.

In 1912, he was sent to Kraków, and, in the same year, to Rome, where he studied philosophy, theology, mathematics, and physics. He took a great interest in astrophysics and the prospect of space flight. While in Rome he designed[citation needed] an airplane-like spacecraft, similar in concept to the eventual space shuttle, and attempted to patent it. He earned a doctorate in philosophy in 1915 at the Pontifical Gregorian University, and the doctorate in theology in 1919 at the Pontifical University of St. Bonaventure. During his time as a student, he witnessed vehement demonstrations against Popes St. Pius X and Benedict XV by the Freemasons in Rome and was inspired to organize the Militia Immaculata, or Army of Mary, to work for conversion of sinners and the enemies of the Catholic Church through the intercession of the Virgin Mary. In 1918, he was ordained a priest. In the conservative publications of the Militia Immaculatae, he particularly condemned Freemasonry, Communism, Zionism, Capitalism and Imperialism.

In 1919, he returned to the newly independent Poland, where he was very active in promoting the veneration of the Immaculate Virgin Mary, founding and supervising the monastery of Niepokalanów near Warsaw, a seminary, a radio station, and several other organizations and publications. Between 1930 and 1936, he took a series of missions to Japan, where he founded a monastery at the outskirts of Nagasaki, a Japanese paper, and a seminary. The monastery he founded remains prominent in the Roman Catholic Church in Japan. Kolbe decided to build the monastery on a mountain side that, according to Shinto beliefs, was not the side best suited to be in tune with nature. When the atomic bomb struck Nagasaki, Kolbe's monastery was saved because the blast of the bomb hit the side of the mountain that the monastery was not located on, the said side took the main blow of the blast. Had Kolbe built the monastery on the side of mountain he was advised to choose, his work and all of his fellow monks would have been destroyed.

Auschwitz

During the Second World War, in the friary, Kolbe provided shelter to refugees from Greater Poland, including 2,000 Jews whom he hid from Nazi persecution in his friary in Niepokalanów. He was also active as a radio amateur, with Polish call letters SP3RN, vilifying Nazi activities through his reports.
On February 17, 1941, he was arrested by the German Gestapo and imprisoned in the Pawiak prison, and, on May 25, was transferred to Auschwitz I as prisoner #16670.

In July 1941, a man from Kolbe's barracks had vanished, prompting SS-Hauptsturmführer Karl Fritzsch, the Lagerführer (i.e., the camp commander), to pick 10 men from the same barracks to be starved to death in Block 11 (notorious for torture), in order to deter further escape attempts. (The man who had disappeared was later found drowned in the camp latrine.) One of the selected men, Franciszek Gajowniczek, cried out, lamenting his family, and Kolbe volunteered to take his place.

During the time in the cell, he led the men in songs and prayer. After three weeks of dehydration and starvation, only Kolbe was still alive. Finally he was executed with an injection of carbolic acid.

Kolbe is one of ten 20th-century martyrs from across the world who are depicted in statues above the Great West Door of Westminster Abbey, London. He was canonized by Pope John Paul II on 10 October 1982, in the presence of Gajowniczek.


Militia Immaculata Consecration Prayer
Composed by Saint Maximilian Kolbe

O Immaculata, Queen of Heaven and earth, refuge of sinners and our most loving Mother, God has willed to entrust the entire order of mercy to you. I, (name), a repentant sinner, cast myself at your feet, humbly imploring you to take me with all that I am and have, wholly to yourself as your possession and property. Please make of me, of all my powers of soul and body, of my whole life, death and eternity, whatever most pleases you.
If it pleases you, use all that I am and have without reserve, wholly to accomplish what was said of you: "She will crush your head," and "You alone have destroyed all heresies in the whole world. " Let me be a fit instrument in your immaculate and merciful hands for introducing and increasing your glory to the maximum in all the many strayed and indifferent souls, and thus help extend as far as possible the blessed kingdom of the most Sacred Heart of Jesus. For wherever you enter you obtain the grace of conversion and growth in holiness, since it is through your hands that all graces come to us from the most Sacred Heart of Jesus.

V. Allow me to praise you, O sacred Virgin
R. Give me strength against your enemies


Saint Maximilian Kolbe's commentary on the Militia Immaculata Marian Consecration Prayer

Saint Maximilian Kolbe is one of my favorite saints. I was consecrated to the Immaculata through the YMI (Youth Mission of the Immaculata) and the Father Kolbe Missionaries of the Immaculata many years ago.

I found this video with a brief story of his life and many pictures:



I wish we had many, many more priests like Saint Maximilian Kolbe! I would not be surprised to find there are some out there.

Whatever the case, we are all called to be saints. Each one of us was created by God in order to know, love, and serve Him in this life in order that we may be happy with him forever in the next life.

Not everyone is called to the priesthood. Not everyone is called to religious life. Not everyone is called to martyrdom.

However, all of us, and each human being you meet is called to be a saint. We are all called to holiness. The fact that we are not all called to the priesthood, religious life, or martyrdom does not mean we don't have to be holy.

Heaven is for saints.

Saints are sinners who recognize their weakness, sinfulness, and imperfection, and then repent and turn to God.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, August 14, 2007 at 10:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, August 13, 2007
Religion of Peace: Why Christianity Is And Islam Isn’t




Give this interview a listen: Michelle interviews Robert Spencer about Religion of Peace: Why Christianity is and Islam Isn’t

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, August 13, 2007 at 01:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, August 09, 2007
The Alleged Apparitions at Garabandal, Spain


Update: More Garabandal Video Footage



From 1961 until 1965 four teenage girls in Garabandal, Spain saw what appeared to be visions of the Virgin Mary, the Infant Jesus, and holy angels. These four children received “messages” about a coming chastisement, a warning that will precede the prophesied chastisement, and a future miracle.

The warning to come first and was promised to occur within a year prior to the miracle. The promised miracle was to manifest itself at a grove of trees near Garabandal. Proponents of the alleged apparitions at Garabandal explain, "It will be the greatest miracle that Jesus will have ever performed for the world.” They go on to explain that after the miracle a "visible supernatural sign will remain in sight until the end of time." They then warn that if the world does not convert from sin after the warning and the miracle, a great chastisement will follow.

A succession of bishops of Santander, the diocese in which Garabandal is located, have condemned the apparition, as can be seen here: The Alleged Apparitions at Garabandal, Spain

Conchita and the rest of the children signed a document with the bishop agreeing with the findings of the Church and promising never to promote the apparitions again. Does that sound like the Church is open to the possibility that these visions are from heaven? The original visionaries have reportedly lived up to this signed document, but the Garabandal promoters have not.

All of the children have reportedly retracted all belief in the miracles.

Arguments Against The Heavenly Character Of The Visions At Garabandal:

All eight bishops of Santander have, from 1961 up to now, supported by the Holy See in Rome, publicly declared that there is no evidence that supernatural apparitions have taken place in Garabandal. This does not mean the Church is saying that nothing out of the ordinary, beyond the natural, or preternatural happened at Garabandal. It only means that the Church, through a succession of bishops and with the affirmation of the Holy See, has repeatedly insisted that there is no evidence that what happened at Garabandal was of a heavenly origin. What does that imply?

False Prophesies:

A locution told the children that Pope Paul VI would live to see the Great Miracle. This is problematic, because Pope Paul VI entered eternity on August 6, 1978.

In Conchita's diary one can read (p.164, Dutch edition) that Pope Paul VI knew the date of the Great Miracle.

The “Virgin” promised that St. Padre Pio would witness the miracle. St. Padre Pio entered eternity on September 23, 1968.

One of the locutions received by the children included the prediction that there would be only three more popes until "the end of the times." Pope John XXIII was the pope at that time. Since then, we have had Popes Paul VI, Pope John Paul I, and Pope John Paul II.

Since Pope John Paul II was Pope John XXIII's third successor, Pope John Paul II, according to the prophecies associated with the visions at Garabandal, should have been the last pope. This is problematic, because Pope John Paul II entered eternity on April 2, 2005, there has been no warning and no miracle, and Pope Benedict XVI has been validly elected by the conclave of cardinals and has been the reigning pontiff since April 19, 2005.

More Red Flags:

In 1966 Conchita wanted to enter the Carmelite Convent in Pamplona. "Jesus" told her to go back to the world.

Conchita made a museum of her house in Garabandal. She has since sold that house and owns a house in New York and a flat in Fatima as well. Compare that with St. Bernadette in Lourdes.

Conchita reportedly admitted to Father J. Pelletier that she herself had stolen the Host from the tabernacle for the so-called mystical communion.

Just before the visions in Garabandal the four seers had stolen apples. The first vision reportedly began when the girls decided to steal some apples from a schoolteacher's tree. An unseen force reportedly forced the girls to their knees. In this first apparition they saw what appeared to be a holy angel.

Conchita was reportedly often caught in contradictions.

Strange Claims:

Many of the visions reportedly involved the girls having conversations with the “Lady” about frivolous things, such as how the “Lady” liked their clothing.

The children were reportedly “given” the “Child Jesus” to pass around to one another in a manner very much like the way one would see children handling a toy doll. The children also claim to have touched the “Virgin” many times. However, they acknowledged that they could not feel anything during these occasions.

After seeing the children apparently passing some unseen object around, which was later said to be the Infant Jesus, people asked the girls if they actually touched the Infant Jesus.

The girls replied, “No, you cannot touch either the Blessed Mother or the Infant.”

“But how can this be?” the people asked.

The girls explained, “Well, you see what you hold, but you feel nothing; you feel no weight. If you stretch your hand to touch Our Lady, your hand can go no further because Our Lady is there, but you feel nothing.”

The girls reportedly claimed that they gave sweets to the Infant Jesus.

The “Virgin” asked that the girls not bring blessed sacramentals [rosaries, crucifixes, etc.], because she wanted to bless these objects herself. The vision is reported to have blessed and kisses hundreds of objects. This is troubling for two reasons: first, because only blessed sacramentals affect the devil and fallen angels; second, the Blessed Virgin Mary is not a priest and therefore she cannot confer a priestly blessing.

Conchita reportedly said the Blessed Mother played hide and seek with her.

The Blessed Virgin is also said to have helped find shoes which had been lost by some of the pilgrims.

The Blessed Mother was said to have told the children that she perfumed the brushes of her slippers.

More On The Character Of The Visions:

The visions caused the children to perform unnatural movements with their bodies. The girls were observed and photographed levitating and having ecstatic falls where they were frozen in unnatural positions from which those around them could not move them. On one occasion, one of the children was reportedly lifted over the top of a building. They were led up and down a rocky hill, walking backwards and forwards, with their heads tilted back in an awkward position while moving awkwardly and at an unnatural pace, hundreds of feet to meet the vision. During every vision, the children were forced to their knees in what has been described by some as a quick, undignified manor. Frequently the girls were forced with their heads tilted backwards in a position that appeared abnormal and uncomfortable. During the visions the girls were inspired (or compelled) to perform elaborately embellished versions of the Sign of the Cross that might be construed as a mockery of this simple and ancient act prayer. You may also notice that the the crucifix is not held upright by one of the visionaries during the video, but almost always at odd angles. The girls were also seen, photographed, and videotaped lifting one another other up above their shoulders to kiss the “lady”, whereas, on other occasions, three grown men could not lift them.

All of the children were heard to speak in languages they did not know. On one occasion the girls were heard praying the Lord’s Prayer in Greek.

There were reportedly “signs in the sky” seen by many people on many occasions: moving stars, hosts, images, etc. In one case a fire was seen and the “Virgin” claimed that she had come in this fire.

On one occasion the “holy angel” gave “communion” to Conchita and the host was visible to everyone. She had been instructed to hold out her tongue until the “Virgin” came. Conchita remained in the same position and with her tongue outstretched with the host on her tongue for an extended period of time. Many photographs were taken.

The warning is supposed to be seen and felt by everyone in the world so that all people will know their sins, see their souls as God sees them, thereby having their consciences enlightened and repent. Were that the case we would have no need to be watchful and keep our lamp burning, since God will warn us in time to repent. Moreover, would this not occasion the conversion of everyone who survived the warning? How then would the rest of history, as prophesied in Sacred Scripture play out? How will it be that “the charity of many shall grow cold” as predicted by Our Lord? (Matthew 24:12) Why did Our Lord say, “But when the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on earth?” (Luke 18:8) How will many, if not most of the world be persuaded to follow the Antichrist as prophesied in the Book of Revelation?

If you read the official pronouncements about Garabandal, you will notice they all say the Church cannot say that the events there were supernatural. The supernatural is above all natures, and therefore proper to God alone. So these statements say that the Church cannot say these visions came from God. However, that does not rule out a preternatural influence. The term preternatural is used to distinguish from the divine (supernatural) while maintaining a distinction from the purely natural. The preternatural or praeternatural is that which appears outside or beyond (Latin præter) the natural. The angels, both holy and fallen, are endowed with preternatural powers. Their intellect, speed, and other characteristics are beyond human capacities, but still finite.

Since the prophecies associated with Garabandal, including prophecies attributed to the blessed Virgin Mary, have proven false, they can't have come from God, The Blessed Virgin, or holy angels, who cannot sin and therefore would not deceive people.

Sacred Scripture Teaches:

But the prophet who presumes to speak a word in my name which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.' And if you say in your heart, `How may we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?' – when a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the word does not come to pass or come true, that is a word which the Lord has not spoken; the prophet has spoken it presumptuously, you need not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22)
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits." (Matthew 7:15-20)
Looking at the videos, it's clear something beyond the natural realm caused the events at Garabandal. I just don't think it was from heaven.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, August 09, 2007 at 01:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (32) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, August 03, 2007
Hannity & Colmes: On Exorcism


Posted by Thomistic on Friday, August 03, 2007 at 08:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, August 02, 2007
Fr. Z Weighs In On The St. Mary's By The Sea "Parishioners Only" Situation


St. Mary's by the Sea Parish

Here's the link to Fr. Z's post: Diocese of Orange and the MP: not registered at parish? Go away!

Fr. Z's observations are good. He does not seem to be aware of some of the other issues in the Diocese of Orange and he (and some other readers) may benefit from looking at the following articles:

Bishop Tod Brown's New Requirement: The Traditional Latin Mass At St. Mary's By The Sea Is Only For St. Mary's Parishioners

Open Letter to Tod Brown, Bishop of Orange

Why Does Bishop Tod Brown Support Rod Stephens?

Vocations director under fire in California

A Ban on Kneeling? Some Catholics Won’t Stand for It

The Kneeling Controversy At St. Mary's by the Sea Parish

The Diocese Of Orange Clarifies

Now On YouTube: Bishop Tod Brown Refuses To Give Holy Communion To A Kneeling Woman

Bishop Tod Brown: More Defiance In Orange County?

The Blasphemous Halloween Masses: More Footage

Even More Footage: Catholic Halloween Mass

Halloween Mass 3 - The Barney Blessing

Bishop Brown's Empire Strikes Back: No Tridentine For You!

The problems in the Diocese of Orange can't just be written off as stemming from a group of grudge-holding, prickly traditionalists. There is a clear history of support for heterodoxy and persecution of orthodoxy in the Diocese of Orange, as evidenced by the linked pages in this post.

Yes, it is very, very good that the Tridentine Mass is scheduled to return to St. Mary's by the Sea and will also very likely come to some other parishes in the Diocese of Orange, but traditional Catholics at St. Mary's by the Sea, as well as orthodox Catholics throughout the Diocese of Orange have always been unhappy with much more than the fact that Bishop Tod Brown used the late Fr. Daniel Johnson's retirement as an opportunity to jettison the Tridentine Mass and liturgically re-educate the parish by asking parishioners who continued to kneel after the Angus Dei to leave the parish and the diocese. As you can see from the links above, there are some highly questionable liturgical practices within the Diocese of Orange in other parishes. In fact, there are a number of parishes in the Diocese of Orange where they never kneel during any part of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. Some parishes in the Diocese of Orange don't even have kneelers. These parishes were not subjected to a liturgical crackdown. However, St. Mary's by the Sea (which has a reputation for traditional piety) was on the receiving end of a liturgical crackdown that made the front page of the Los Angeles Times! That says a lot about the priorities in the Diocese of Orange.

There is much work to be done in the Diocese of Orange, even after the return of the Tridentine Mass.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, August 02, 2007 at 09:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, August 01, 2007
The Life & Death Of Religious Life by Fr. Benedict Groeschel, CFR


First Things Magazine for June/July 2007 has an excellent article by Fr. Benedict Groeschel, CFR. The article is titled, "The Life & Death Of Religious Life".

It is linked here: The Life & Death Of Religious Life

Give it a read and share your thoughts.

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, August 01, 2007 at 10:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Summorum Pontificum Contact Database


Jimmy Akin has a post about the Summorum Pontificum Contact Database. The database is an excellent idea.

Here's some of Jimmy Akin's post:

[The Summorum Pontificum Contact Database] is designed to help make connections between people interested in having the extraordinary form of the Latin rite liturgy celebrated in their area (i.e., the "Tridentine Mass").
It's only been out (so far as I know) since the motu proprio was released, and it's already got 1400 contacts listed. The interface even allows you to specify possible ways that you might be able to help out (e.g., if you are a priest willing to say the Tridentine liturgy, if you're willing to sing in a schola, if you're able to help train altar servers).


Here's the link to the database: Summorum Pontificum Contact Database

Here's a link to Jimmy Akin's post: Jimmy Akin - Summorum Pontificum Contact Database

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, July 25, 2007 at 09:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, July 24, 2007
More Good News: The Tridentine Mass At St. Mary's By The Sea Will Not Use The New Lectionary

California Catholic Daily reports that St. Mary's by the Sea will not be using the new lectionary for the celebration of the Tridentine Mass, despite Fr. Martin Tran's bulletin for July 14-15, 2007, which had indicated that it would.

Here's the story: “Until such time that the Ecclesia Dei Commission gives further direction”

To be fair to Fr. Tran, the hybrid Mass initially proposed was not Fr. Tran's idea, as California Catholic Daily reports:

The introduction of the New Rite’s vernacular readings into the Tridentine Mass was not by Tran’s initiative. Brown, in a July 10 memorandum to the priests of the Orange diocese, said he favored the use of the new lectionary so that “‘the entire parish community, whether utilizing the forma ordinaria [the Missal of Paul VI] or the public forma extraordinaria [the Missal of Pius V] may be united in heart and mind around a single proclamation of God’s word.”

It is my opinion that Fr. Tran has always been a kind, obedient priest who only sought to comply with the directives and expressed or perceived wishes of Bishop Tod Brown, even during the "kneeling when Bishop Brown says not to kneel is a mortal sin" controversy which sparked the Los Angeles Times' front page article, A Ban on Kneeling? Some Catholics Won’t Stand for It.

California Catholic Daily reports that Ms. Lesa Truxaw, Bishop Tod Brown's director of the Office for Worship for the Diocese of Orange, has issued a memo clarifying that the readings for Tridentine Masses in Orange County will come from the correct calendar and the Missal of Blessed John XXIII, including the readings from that Missal, will be used.

Quote from Lesa Truxaw:

“After September 14, the Exhalation [sic] of the Holy Cross,” said the memorandum, “when the Motu Prioprio [sic] becomes effective and when the forma extraordinaria is celebrated, the calendar of the Missal of Blessed John XXIII along with the readings contained in the Missal should be used until such time that the Ecclesia Dei Commission gives further direction.”

My own opinion, and this is not meant to be taken as an attack, is that confusion like this indicates that even leaders within the Church (including bishops) don't know very much about the Tridentine Mass, which is the only explanation for making mistakes like suggesting a hybrid Mass using the new lectionary. It may be charitable to suggest that perhaps a good deal of the opposition to the Tridentine Mass on the part of many Catholics (again, including some bishops and/or "liturgical experts") is rooted in similar confusion and genuine ignorance.

I would also suggest that arguments against kneeling are also rooted in varying degrees of ignorance, as Pope Benedict XVI indicates here: The Theology of Kneeling

Here's something else to consider...

Although Summorum Pontificum sets September 14th, 2007, the Feast of The Exaltation of the Holy Cross, as the date by which the motu proprio must be implemented, it isn't entirely accurate to say that's the day the motu proprio "becomes effective". There is absolutely nothing which prevents Bishop Tod Brown from allowing the Tridentine Mass to be celebrated at St. Mary's by the Sea (or anywhere else) prior to the September 14th deadline for the implementation of Summorum Pontificum.

Still, all of this can only be seen as more good news from Bishop Tod Brown and the chancery offices of the Diocese of Orange.

It is my own hope that parishioners at St. Mary's by the Sea will ask Fr. Tran to have a daily Tridentine Mass, in addition to the daily 8:00 AM celebration of the morning Mass according to the Missal of Paul VI.

The celebration of a daily Tridentine Mass is allowed by Summorum Pontificum. In addition to the celebration of daily Tridentine Masses, it is also permissible to celebrate the Tridentine Mass "for special circumstances such as marriages, funerals or occasional celebrations, i.e., pilgrimages". It should also be noted that it is not necessary to seek permission from the local ordinary (the bishop) for Sunday, daily, or "special circumstance" celebrations of the Tridentine Mass. All that is necessary is for parishioners to request this of their pastors and for their pastors to have the means of providing a priest who is competent to properly celebrate the Tridentine Mass.

Quote from Summorum Pontificum:

Art. 5. §1 In parishes, where there is a stable group of faithful who adhere to the earlier liturgical tradition, the pastor should willingly accept their requests to celebrate the Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, and ensure that the welfare of these faithful harmonizes with the ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the guidance of the bishop in accordance with Canon 392, avoiding discord and favoring the unity of the whole Church.

§2 Celebration in accordance with the Missal of Blessed John XXIII may take place on working days; while on Sundays and feast days one such celebration may also be held.

§3 For faithful and priests who request it, the pastor should also allow celebrations in this extraordinary form for special circumstances such as marriages, funerals or occasional celebrations, i.e., pilgrimages.

§4 Priests who use the Missal of Blessed John XXIII must be qualified to do so and not juridically impeded.

§5 In churches that are not parish or conventual churches, it is the duty of the rector of the church to grant the above permission.

Here's something else to consider, as pointed out by the traditionaliist Catholic newspaper, The Remnant:

The Pope explodes the myth of the “forbidden” Mass

First of all, the Supreme Pontiff—we rejoice simply to see the use of this honorific again in the Motu Proprio!—has put an end to the lie that has hung like a funeral pall over the Church for the past forty years; the lie so assiduously cultivated by liberal bishops and “conservative” Catholic spokesman alike: that Paul VI forbade the traditional Latin Mass without special “permission” in the form of an indult. Art. I of the Motu Proprio and Pope Benedict’s Explanatory Letter to the bishops leave no room for argument, declaring that the traditional Missal was never abrogated and that no permission was ever needed to use it:

Art. 1:

The Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI is the ordinary expression of the Lex orandi [Law of prayer] of the Catholic Church of the Latin rite. Nonetheless, the Roman Missal promulgated by St. Pius V and reissued by Bl. John XXIII is to be considered as an extraordinary expression of that same Lex orandi, and must be given due honour for its venerable and ancient usage….

It is, therefore, permissible to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass following the typical edition of the Roman Missal promulgated by Bl. John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as an extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church….

Explanatory Letter:

As for the use of the 1962 Missal as a Forma extraordinaria of the liturgy of the Mass, I would like to draw attention to the fact that this Missal was never juridically abrogated and, consequently, in principle, was always permitted….

What earlier generations held as sacred, remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful.

Pope Benedict himself confirms, precisely as traditionalists have always contended, that as a matter of ecclesiastical law Pope Paul never did anything more than promulgate his own Missal. While the Pauline rite in its vernacular translations became in practice the “ordinary form” of Mass in the Western Church, with the traditional Latin Mass thus becoming “extraordinary”—which is only a statement of the obvious—this development in no way amounted to a prohibition of the traditional Missal. Therefore, its use was “always permitted” in principle even if it was de facto excluded in practice. Paul VI did not—indeed, could not—“ban” the received and approved Latin rite of the Mass.

The Motu Proprio only reflects a truth about the Church that Benedict acknowledged when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger: “[T]he Church, throughout her history, has never abolished nor forbidden orthodox liturgical forms, which would be quite alien to the Spirit of the Church….”2 That is, to “forbid” the celebration of the traditional Latin Mass would be contrary to the Church’s very nature in the Holy Ghost. It would also be contrary to the very nature of the Petrine office as the guardian of liturgical tradition. As the former Cardinal Ratzinger wrote only five years before his election as Supreme Pontiff:

After the Second Vatican Council, the impression arose that the pope really could do anything in liturgical matters, especially if he were acting on the mandate of an ecumenical council. Eventually, the idea of the givenness of the liturgy, the fact that one cannot do with it what one will, faded from the public consciousness of the West. In fact, the First Vatican Council had in no way defined the pope as an absolute monarch. On the contrary, it presented him as the guarantor of obedience to the revealed Word. The pope’s authority is bound to the Tradition of faith, and that also applies to the liturgy. It is not “manufactured” by the authorities. Even the pope can only be a humble servant of its lawful development and abiding integrity and identity.3

The same Cardinal Ratzinger also wrote that the suppression of the traditional Missal (under the false pretext of a de jure abolition) “introduced a breach into the history of the liturgy whose consequences could only be tragic…[T]he old building was demolished, and another was built…[T]his has caused us great harm.”4

These truths have now been translated into a papal decree that reaffirms the legal status of the traditional Latin Mass as part of the inviolable and indispensable patrimony of the Holy Catholic Church. The Motu Proprio is not, therefore, a “universal Indult”; it does not give “permission” for that which, as the Pope himself states, was “never abrogated” and “was always permitted.” The Motu Proprio thus does not expand upon the 1984 and 1988 “indults”; rather, it simply abolishes them by substitution (“the conditions for the use of this Missal as laid down by earlier documents Quattuor abhinc annos’ and ‘Ecclesia Dei’, are substituted as follows…”).

I cannot emphasize enough how much we can all be grateful to Pope Benedict XVI! I encourage catholics everywhere to show the Holy Father an abundance of gratitude through letters of thanks, prayers, spiritual bouquets (indicating that the sender will undertake certain devotional acts on behalf of another person, as in honor of a special occasion or in memoriam), works of mercy, and even donations to Peter's Pence.

Nota bene: Adoremus Bulletin has an excellent article by Helen Hull Hitchcock on Summorum Pontificum which can be read here: Pope Extends Use of the "1962 Missal" – What Does this Mean?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, July 24, 2007 at 08:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, July 22, 2007
California Daily Catholic: Do The Old Rite Right
California Daily Catholic has an excellent opinion piece on the celebration of the Tridentine Mass.

Here's the article: Do The Old Rite Right


Here's a section of the article:

Since Pope Benedict XVI freed up the celebration of the traditional Latin Mass in his Motu Proprio, Summorum Pontificum, I’ve heard oft-repeated the comforting assurance, “The Tridentine Mass only appeals to a very small percentage of Catholics. Most Catholics are happy with the rite of the Mass celebrated in the vernacular.”
I call this an “assurance” and “comforting” because one of the greatest fears of “progressive” Catholics is the return of the Bad Old Days before Vatican II -- the days when the “Spirit” did not dash about the Church as freely as It does today. The “Tridentine” Mass, of course, is for many the symbol of that oppressive past, just as wisecracking celebrants, “Glory and Praise,” altar girls, and liturgical dance routines are of the age of liberation. The return of the Tridentine Mass is the reemergence of the stern, old Patriarch just when we were beginning to have fun.

I don’t mean to spoil anyone’s party, but it is, perhaps, premature to say that most Catholics are happy with their typical parish Masses, especially when they’ve never experienced anything else. Anyone who has been condemned for a time to eat institutional food knows that, after a while, one’s initial disgust with it wears off. One may even begin to enjoy the slop. What of those who have never known better food? What would happen if, instead of greasy chicken-fried steak, they were suddenly presented with a well-cooked cut of beef? Some, of course, may want to stick with what they’ve been used to, but others – many others – may find they like good food and come to regard the old fare with a species of disgust.

This has, indeed, been the case for many Catholics whose only experience of the Mass has been through the “liturgical renewal” that began in the late ‘60s. It’s not just Old Folks who attend the Tridentine Masses. The number of young people who come to prefer the Old Rite might increase when and if it becomes more widely available – especially since most younger people who remain in the Church tend to be devoted to “old-fashioned” orthodoxy.

The number of younger people attending the Tridentine Mass might continue to grow, if devotees of the rite and the priests that serve them carefully cultivate its beauties and draw from it the richness that is found in Catholic Tradition.

I myself am not what one would call a doctrinaire devotee of the Tridentine Mass. I prefer, in fact, the Byzantine Divine Liturgy, which I attend on Sundays. I have even assisted at celebrations of the Novus Ordo – said in Latin, with incense and Gregorian Chant – that I would choose over many a Tridentine Mass I’ve attended. And I have been to many Tridentine Masses -- Solemn High Masses, High Masses, Missae Cantatae, and low Masses. I have witnessed profoundly beautiful celebrations of the Old Rite – more beautiful, I admit, than anything comparable in the New Rite – so I know just how exquisite the Tridentine Mass can be. I have even attended low Masses in the rite that have been quietly moving.

If such celebrations became common, I fear the worries of progressives about the liberalization of the Old Latin Mass might prove quite well-founded. But my experience of most of the celebrations of the Old Rite leads me to fear that richly beautiful celebrations of it may prove to be few and far between, at least in California and other states.


Be sure to read the whole thing. It's very well written.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, July 22, 2007 at 12:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, July 21, 2007
Instant Canonization?


The Adoration of the Blessed Trinity by Albrecht Dürer

Catholic investigative reporter, Robert Kumpel, has a new blog called st. john's valdosta blog.

Give it a read. You'll enjoy it.

I particularly enjoyed his post on the tendency people have to assume someone went straight to heaven after death. Here's the post: Instant Canonization?

The idea that everyone who dies goes straight to heaven is a very Protestant mindset, but it's infected many, many Catholics.

The reality of Purgatory and the need to pray for those who have gone before us should influence our daily lives. We must pray for those who have died, and we must encourage others to do so. We must ask people to pray for us after we are gone. If I should be fortunate enough to die in the state of sanctifying grace, which is my greatest ambition and most constant prayer, I still sometimes fear that I will still be folding chairs in Purgatory after everyone else has left!

If we pray for them, the souls of the faithful departed will, in turn, pray for us. They are powerful friends. They are destined for heaven. They will not forget our assistance.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, July 21, 2007 at 02:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Bishop Tod Brown & Summorum Pontificum, Part 2


Below is the text of the message Bishop Tod Brown, of the Diocese of Orange, California, sent to the priests in his diocese regarding the implementation of Summorum Pontificum in the Diocese of Orange under his administration:

DIOCESE OF ORANGE OFFICE OF THE BISHOP MEMORANDUM
To: The Presbyterate of Orange
From: Most Reverend Tod D. Brown
Re: The Motu Proprio Summorum Pontificum
Date: 10 July 2007

On Saturday, July 7, 2007, our Holy Father, Pope Benedict XVI issued an Apostolic Letter “Motu Proprio data,” (on his own initiative) entitled, Summorum Pontificum, on the use of the Roman liturgy prior to the reform of 1970. Together with the Motu Proprio was a personal letter from the Holy Father to the Bishops of the world that provided an historical and pastoral context for the issuance of the Motu Proprio.

The following link to the Bishop’s Committee on the Liturgy newsletter (http://www.usccb.org/liturgy/bclnewsletterjune07.pdf) will provide a copy of the Motu Proprio together with its introductory letter from our Holy Father as well as a series of “Twenty Questions on the Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificum” prepared by the Secretariat for the Liturgy of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, that may provide helpful directives in our appropriate pastoral response to the Apostolic Letter.

I welcome the Holy Father's call for unity within the Church and especially toward those who are attached to celebrating the Mass according to the Missal of 1962. My abiding desire is for unity and harmony among all our Catholic faithful in our Diocese. That is why, in anticipation of the promulgation of this Motu Proprio, I took the initiative to inaugurate an additional Latin so-called “Tridentine” Mass at the Pope John Paul II Center.

Our Holy Father clearly underscores the fact that the norm or “Forma ordinaria” of the Eucharistic Liturgy remains the Missal published by Pope Paul VI, now in its third typical edition. Use of the last version of the Missale Romanum published under the authority of Blessed John XXIII in 1962, will now be able to be used as a “Forma extraordinaria” of the liturgical celebration under the provisions expressed in the Apostolic Letter.

I urge all pastors to join me in a common pastoral approach to the implementation of the Motu Proprio. It is the prerogative of pastors when requested by “a group of faithful (coetus fidelium) attached to the previous liturgical tradition exists stably (or continuously) (continenter exsistit),” i.e., parishioners in the full canonical sense of that term, and who request the celebration of the Holy Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962, together with the other liturgical celebrations as specified in the Apostolic Letter, it is their prerogative to “willingly accede (libenter suscipiat) to their requests, if the following conditions can be pastorally met:

· The availability of a priest, in good standing, who can demonstrate a minimum rubrical and linguistic ability to celebrate the extraordinary form.

· The ‘group’ of the faithful (that) exists ‘stably’ needs to be of sufficient number to warrant the public use of the forma extraordinaria. Individuals who are not geographically or intentionally part of a particular parish community should have recourse to their proper parish with their request or to the existing public celebrations that presently are offered in the Diocese of Orange at Mission San Juan Capistrano and Pope John Paul II Center.

· If the public celebration of the Eucharist in forma extraordinaria is conceded in accord with the norms as articulated in the Apostolic Letter (Art. #6), serious consideration should be given in using the Readings in the vernacular using the reformed Lectionary for Mass and its expanded cursus of Scripture texts. In this way, the entire parish community, whether utilizing the forma ordinaria or the public forma extraordinaria may be united in heart and mind around a single proclamation of God’s word.

While great responsibility is placed upon the pastor of the local parish in making these pastoral determinations, it remains for the Bishop of the Local Church in his role as moderator of the liturgy in his own diocese, to insure peace and serenity in the implementation of the universal norms of the Church regarding the worthy celebration of the liturgy as well as to intervene to prevent abuses from arising with regard to liturgical celebrations in his diocese.

As pastors charged with the care of souls it is incumbent upon us to do whatever we can to help build a greater sense of communion in our local Church where divisions may exist particularly in areas of liturgical praxis. May this Apostolic Letter be an opportunity for us all to renew our commitment to being worthy stewards of the Holy Mysteries faithfully celebrated in accord with the rich Tradition of the Church.


12:00 PM Tridentine Masses will resume at St. Mary's by the Sea in Huntington Beach beginning on September 16, 2007. Unfortunately, the readings will be from the "current Lectionary", which is somewhat confusing, especially since the readings from the "current Lectionary" don't fit the Tridentine calendar.

Here is the bulletin from St. Mary's by the Sea: St. Mary's by the Sea Parish Bulletin, July 14-15, 2007

In so far as Bishop Brown's letter, I will only comment on one part.

Bishop Brown said:

"I welcome the Holy Father's call for unity within the Church and especially toward those who are attached to celebrating the Mass according to the Missal of 1962. My abiding desire is for unity and harmony among all our Catholic faithful in our Diocese. That is why, in anticipation of the promulgation of this Motu Proprio, I took the initiative to inaugurate an additional Latin so-called “Tridentine” Mass at the Pope John Paul II Center."
Why does that part of his message remind me of the scene in The Song of Bernadette where the mayor tells Bernadette (in front of the media and other onlookers) that he always supported her and he remembers a time when he (the mayor) and Bernadette stood alone against much opposition?

You may recall that I commented on Bishop Brown's pre-motu proprio indult here: Indult or Insult?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, July 18, 2007 at 03:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (21) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, July 16, 2007
Bishop Tod Brown & Summorum Pontificum


Bishop Tod Brown reportedly sent a letter to the priests of the Diocese of Orange saying that the implementation of Summorum Pontificum will be from a significant number of registered parishioners requesting the Traditional Latin Mass.

Does anyone have a copy of this letter that might be posted on the blog?

To his credit, Bishop Brown did allow the celebration of a Tridentine Funeral Mass for Michael Blankfield today at St. Mary's by the Sea. Please pray for the repose of Michael's soul and for strength and comfort for his grieving family.

You may recall that Michael's mother Carol Blankfield was the woman who was denied Holy Communion by Bishop Brown until she stood to receive The Holy Eucharist, because she initially knelt to receive the Blessed Sacrament. It was very merciful of Bishop Brown to allow a Tridentine Funeral Mass for Michael and to offer his own condolences through his secretary when the permission was sought and granted.

Bishop Brown also allowed (and attended, and knelt during!) the Tridentine Funeral Mass at St. Mary's by the Sea for Fr. Daniel Johnson, the former pastor of St. Mary's by the Sea parish.

These are wonderful signs of Bishop Brown's recognition of the love so many, many Catholics still in full communion with Rome, within his diocese have for the Traditional Latin Mass.

Let us pray that Bishop Brown's generosity in this regard grows, and say to Bishop Brown, in unison with Pope Benedict XVI:

"I think of a sentence in the Second Letter to the Corinthians, where Paul writes: "Our mouth is open to you, Corinthians; our heart is wide. You are not restricted by us, but you are restricted in your own affections. In return … widen your hearts also!" (2 Cor 6:11-13). Paul was certainly speaking in another context, but his exhortation can and must touch us too, precisely on this subject. Let us generously open our hearts and make room for everything that the faith itself allows."
Does anyone know of any organized efforts to have the Traditional Latin Mass in any parishes within the Diocese of Orange?

Does anyone else think the hundreds of letters and 1,200 signatures on a petition to reinstate the Tridentine Mass at St. Mary's by the Sea parish that Bishop Brown received (and rejected) several years ago, as well as the requests Bishop Brown received last year from several groups of parishioners at St. Mary's by the Sea would constitute a "significant number of registered parishioners requesting the Traditional Latin Mass"?

Can anyone point out to me where Summorum Pontificum requires that "a significant number of registered parishioners" must request the Traditional Latin Mass for the implication of Summorum Pontificum in any given parish, or even that the Bishop's permission is explicitly required for what has been deemed by the Holy Father as an "extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church"?

If any diocesan bishop feels that extraordinary means rare, perhaps those bishops can explain the abundance of extraordinary ministers of the Holy Eucharist in nearly every parish in every diocese in the United States?

It appears that the usual suspects are trying to obstruct the intentions of Pope Benedict XVI in Summorum Pontificum. I make that statement based on on the responses from other bishops around the country noted on Fr. Z's website: What Does The Prayer Really Say?

I also note the comments posted over at Rorate Caeli blog here: "How is your Bishop reacting to Summorum? [and all other Bishops]"

I found this statement particularly sad: Statement of Bishop Trautman on Summorum Pontificum

I found this statement particularly encouraging: Diocese of Raleigh, NC, very good

What are your thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, July 16, 2007 at 02:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, July 15, 2007
Los Angeles Archdiocese To Pay A Record $660 Million Dollars To Settle Lawsuits Connected With Claims Of Sexual Abuse At The Hands Of Priests & Religious
The Archdiocese of Los Angeles has agreed to the largest settlement in the history of settlements associated with the sex abuse scandals.

Here's the story: L.A. Archdiocese to settle suits for $660 million

Here's a quote:

The nation’s largest Catholic archdiocese will settle its clergy sex abuse cases for at least $600 million, by far the largest payout in the church’s sexual abuse scandal, The Associated Press learned Saturday.
Attorneys for the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Los Angeles and the plaintiffs will release a statement Sunday morning and hold a news conference Monday, said Ray Boucher, the lead plaintiff’s attorney.

An anonymous source with knowledge of the deal placed its value at $660 million, by far the largest payout in the church’s sexual abuse scandal. The amount exceeded earlier reports from sources that the settlement would be between $600 million and $650 million — $1.2 million and $1.3 million per plaintiff.


This part was particularly interesting:

A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge overseeing the cases recently ruled that Mahony could be called to testify in the second trial on schedule, and attorneys for plaintiffs wanted to call him in many more.
The same judge also cleared the way for four people to seek punitive damages — something that could have opened the church to tens of millions of dollars in payouts if the ruling had been expanded to other cases.


The first trial was supposed to begin on Monday.

Has Cardinal Mahony again lived up to his nickname, "Roger the Dodger"?

I'm of the mind that settlements should be made on a case by case basis, and only after releasing all records pertinent to those cases so as to prevent people from taking advantage of the Church by making false allegations against priests and religious.

I'm not saying I don't believe that priests and religious have been guilty of sexual abuse, but I will say that it is not impossible or unheard of for individuals to make false allegations.

I will also go so far as saying that I am aware of some settlements where the abused minor consented to the abuse. In those cases, although the adults in question were guilty of doing something unbelievably wrong, and the teens in question were victims – they weren't innocent victims. They were the victims of what is technically statutory rape. That's not to say the abusing adults weren't more responsible, and it certainly isn't meant to diminish the understanding that what was done was unspeakably evil, but I have to admit that some part of me is troubled by people profiting from consensual, sinful acts.

I'm also saddened by the idea that any number of millions of dollars would be considered worth ending further investigation into what appears to be criminal activity and conspiracy on the part of some Church leaders.

My heart goes out to victims of sexual abuse, and the last thing I would want anyone to think of someone making such a claim was that they were willing to let evil men get away with evil things if the price was right. That, in my opinion, makes such people victims all over again, because the perpetrators get off too easy, and the victims' motives and claims can continue to be challenged.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, July 15, 2007 at 06:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, July 10, 2007
From CNS - Traditionalists: Differences Still Remain Despite The Motu Proprio On The Tridentine Mass
Catholic News Service (CNS) which is the media organ of the USCCB, has an interesting article on the continuing differences between Traditionalists in the Society of St. Pius X and the Holy See.

Here's the story: Traditionalists: Differences still remain after Tridentine document

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 at 03:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (44) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, July 07, 2007
Summorum Pontificum - Published July 7, 2007


The long awaited Motu Proprio has been published! Here is a link to the English translation: Summorum Pontificum Here is a link to the Papal Explanatory Letter to Bishops regarding the Apostolic Letter: Letter Of Explanation The text of the Motu Proprio is also below:

APOSTOLIC LETTER

SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM

OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF BENEDICT XVI

GIVEN

MOTU PROPRIO

It has always been the care of the Supreme Pontiffs until the present time, that the Church of Christ offer worthy worship to the Divine Majesty for the praise and glory of his name and for the good of all his Holy Church. As from time immemorial so in the future the principle shall be respected according to which each particular Church must be in accord with the universal Church not only regarding the doctrine of the faith and sacramental signs, but also as to the usages universally handed down by apostolic and unbroken tradition. These are to be maintained not only so that errors may be avoided, but also so that the faith may be passed on in its integrity, since the Church’s rule of prayer (lex orandi) corresponds to her rule of belief (lex credendi). Among Pontiffs who have displayed such care there excels the name of Saint Gregory the Great, who saw to the transmission to the new peoples of Europe both of the Catholic faith and of the treasures of worship and culture accumulated by the Romans in preceding centuries. He gave instructions for the form of the Sacred Liturgy of both the Sacrifice of the Mass and of the Divine Office as was celebrated in the City. He made the greatest efforts to foster monks and nuns, who progressing under the Rule of St Benedict, in every place along with the proclamation of the Gospel by their life likewise exemplified that most salutary expression of the Rule let nothing be given precedence over the work of God (chapter 43). In this way the sacred liturgy according to the Roman manner made fertile not only the faith and piety but also the culture of many peoples. Moreover it is evident that the Latin Liturgy in its various forms has stimulated in the spiritual life very many Saints in every century of the Christian age and strengthened in the virtue of religion so many peoples and made fertile their piety. However, in order that the Sacred Liturgy might more efficaciously absolve its task, several others among the Roman Pontiffs in the course of the centuries have brought to bear particular concern, among whom Saint Pius V is eminent, who with great pastoral zeal, at the exhortation of the Council of Trent, renewed the worship of the whole Church, ensuring the publishing of liturgical books amended and restored according to the norm of the Fathers and put them into use in the Latin Church. It is clear that among the liturgical books of the Roman Rite the Roman Missal is eminent. It grew in the city of Rome and gradually down through the centuries took on forms which are very similar to those in vigor in recent generations. It was this same goal that as time passed the Roman Pontiffs pursued, adapting or establishing liturgical rites and books to new ages and then at the start of the present century undertaking a more ample restoration. It was in this manner that our Predecessors Clement VIII, Urban VIII, St Pius X, Benedict XV, Pius XII and the Blessed John XXIII acted. In more recent time, however, the Second Vatican Council expressed the desire that with due respect and reverence for divine worship it be restored and adapted to the needs of our age. Prompted by this desire, our Predecessor the Supreme Pontiff Paul VI in 1970 approved for the Latin Church liturgical books restored and partly renewed, and that throughout the world translated into many vernacular languages, have been welcomed by the Bishops and by the priests and faithful. John Paul II revised the third typical edition of the Roman Missal. Thus the Roman Pontiffs have acted so that this liturgical edifice, so to speak, might once again appear splendid in its dignity and harmony. However in some regions not a small number of the faithful have been and remain attached with such great love and affection to the previous liturgical forms, which had profoundly imbued their culture and spirit, that the Supreme Pontiff John Paul II, prompted by pastoral concern for these faithful, in 1984 by means of a special Indult Quattuor abhinc annos, drawn up by the Congregation for Divine Worship, granted the faculty to use the Roman Missal published by John XXIII in 1962; while in 1988 John Paul II once again, by means of the Motu Proprio Ecclesia Dei, exhorted the Bishops to make wide and generous use of this faculty in favor of all the faithful requesting it. Having pondered at length the pressing requests of these faithful to our Predecessor John Paul II, having also heard the Fathers of the Consistory of Cardinals held on 23 March 2006, having pondered all things, invoked the Holy Spirit and placed our confidence in the help of God, by this present Apostolic Letter we DECREE the following.

Art. 1. The Roman Missal promulgated by Paul VI is to be regarded as the ordinary expression of the law of prayer (lex orandi) of the Catholic Church of Latin Rite, while the Roman Missal promulgated by St Pius V and published again by Blessed John XXIII as the extraordinary expression of the law of prayer (lex orandi) and on account of its venerable and ancient use let it enjoy due honor. These two expressions of the law of prayer (lex orandi) of the Church in no way lead to a division in the law of prayer (lex orandi) of the Church, for they are two uses of the one Roman Rite. Hence it is licit to celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass in accordance with the typical edition of the Roman Missal promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962 and never abrogated, as the extraordinary form of the Liturgy of the Church. The conditions laid down by the previous documents Quattuor abhinc annos and Ecclesia Dei for the use of this Missal are replaced by what follows:

Art. 2. In Masses celebrated without the people, any priest of Latin rite, whether secular or religious, can use the Roman Missal published by Pope Blessed John XXIII in 1962 or the Roman Missal promulgated by the Supreme Pontiff Paul VI in 1970, on any day except in the Sacred Triduum. For celebration in accordance with one or the other Missal, a priest does not require any permission, neither from the Apostolic See nor his own Ordinary.

Art. 3. If Communities or Institutes of Consecrated Life or Societies of Apostolic Life of either pontifical or diocesan rite desire to have a celebration of Holy Mass in accordance with the edition of the Roman Missal promulgated in 1962 in the conventual or community celebration in their own oratories, this is allowed. If an individual community or the entire Institute or Society wants to have such celebrations often or habitually or permanently, the matter is to be decided by the Major Superiors according to the norm of law and the particular laws and statutes.

Art. 4. With due observance of law, even Christ’s faithful who spontaneously request it, may be admitted to celebrations of Holy Mass mentioned in art. 2 above.

Art. 5, § 1. In parishes where a group of faithful attached to the previous liturgical tradition exists stably, let the pastor willingly accede to their requests for the celebration of the Holy Mass according to the rite of the Roman Missal published in 1962. Let him see to it that the good of these faithful be harmoniously reconciled with ordinary pastoral care of the parish, under the governance of the Bishop according to canon 392, avoiding discord and fostering the unity of the whole Church. § 2. Celebration according to the Missal of Blessed John XXIII can take place on weekdays, while on Sundays and on feast days there may be one such celebration. § 3. Let the pastor permit celebrations in this extraordinary form for faithful or priests who request it, even in particular circumstances such as weddings, funerals or occasional celebrations, for example pilgrimages. § 4. Priests using the Missal of Blessed John XXIII must be worthy and not impeded by law. § 5. In churches, which are neither parochial nor conventual, it is the Rector of the church who grants the above-mentioned permission.

Art. 6. In Masses celebrated with the people according to the Missal of Blessed John XXIII, the Readings can be proclaimed even in the vernacular, using editions that have received the recognitio of the Apostolic See.

Art. 7. Where some group of lay faithful, mentioned in art. 5§1 does not obtain what it requests from the pastor, it should inform the diocesan Bishop of the fact. The Bishop is earnestly requested to grant their desire. If he cannot provide for this kind of celebration, let the matter be referred to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei.

Art. 8. A Bishop who desires to make provision for requests of lay faithful of this kind, but is for various reasons prevented from doing so, may refer the matter to the Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, which should give him advice and help.

Art. 9, § 1. Likewise a pastor may, all things duly considered, grant permission to use the older ritual in administering the Sacraments of Baptism, Matrimony, Penance and the Anointing of the Sick, as the good of souls may suggest. § 2. Ordinaries are granted the faculty to celebrate the sacrament of Confirmation using the former Roman Pontifical, as the good of souls may suggest. § 3. It is lawful for clerics in holy orders to use even the Roman Breviary promulgated by Blessed John XXIII in 1962.

Art 10. It is lawful for the local Ordinary, if he judges it opportune, to erect a personal parish according to the norm of canon 518 for celebrations according to the older form of the Roman rite or appoint a rector or chaplain, with due observance of the requirements of law.

Art. 11. The Pontifical Commission Ecclesia Dei, erected in 1988 by John Paul II,5 continues to carry out its function. This Commission is to have the form, duties and norm for action that the Roman Pontiff may wish to assign to it.

Art. 12. The same Commission, in addition to the faculties it already enjoys, will exercise the authority of the Holy See by maintaining vigilance over the observance and application of these dispositions. Whatever is decreed by Us by means of this Motu Proprio, we order to be firm and ratified and to be observed as of 14 September this year, the feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, all things to the contrary notwithstanding. Given at Rome, at St Peter’s, on 7 July in the Year of Our Lord 2007, the Third of Our Pontificate.

BENEDICT XVI

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, July 07, 2007 at 09:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (68) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, June 25, 2007
Senator Barack Obama: Christianity Has Been “Hijacked” By The “Christian Right”


Credit where it's due: Hot Air: Video - Obama says Christianity has been “hijacked” by the “Christian Right”

Partial transcript:

“Somehow, somewhere along the way, faith stopped being used to bring us together and faith started being used to drive us apart,” the Democratic presidential candidate said in a 30-minute speech before the national meeting of the United Church of Christ.
“Faith got hijacked, partly because of the so-called leaders of the Christian Right, all too eager to exploit what divides us,” the Illinois senator said.

“At every opportunity, they’ve told evangelical Christians that Democrats disrespect their values and dislike their church, while suggesting to the rest of the country that religious Americans care only about issues like abortion and gay marriage, school prayer and intelligent design,” according to an advance copy of his speech.


These words from Senator Obama annoyed me. I'm tired of this error. It's rooted in a lie.

Compare Senator Obama's words with the words of Christ:

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's foes will be those of his own household. He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake will find it." (Matthew 10:34-39)
"Do you think that I have come to give peace on earth? No, I tell you, but rather division; for henceforth in one house there will be five divided, three against two and two against three; they will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against her mother, mother-in-law against her daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law." (Luke 12:51-53)
Jesus knew His doctrine would cause division, and He demanded that each Christian be willing to choose Him over the love of any human person who refuses to choose Him and be conformed to His doctrine.

The myth of the all-accepting Jesus whose only doctrines were tolerance, love without judgement of external conduct (which is different than the judgement of interior disposition), charity without the courage to lovingly admonish sinners for fear of offending them, and peace at any cost (even the rejection of Christian doctrine), has long been used as a wedge to blind Christians into accepting, condoning, and even defending sin.

It's a natural progression from these errors to conclude that purpose of Christianity isn't to save our souls and help us get to heaven, it's supposed to "unite us".

Unite who?

Sin is fundamentally opposed to goodness, virtue, and truth. The darkness hates the light. Darkness and light cannot coexist peacefully. They cannot have unity.

How can those who hate and oppose every Christian moral teaching and fight those teachings tooth and nail, along with all those who call themselves Christians, but who water down Christianity or deny important doctrinal or moral teachings in order to please those who hate and oppose every Christian moral teaching, be united with faithful Christians who realize that matters of Christian faith and morality are not up for debate or issues on which there can be compromise without essentially denying Christ, rejecting His teaching, and replacing Christ and His teachings with a counterfeit Christ and a counterfeit doctrine?

Those who hate and oppose every Christian moral teaching and fight those teachings tooth and nail generally refuse to compromise (unless they experience a road to Damascus type of conversion). So Christians are the ones expected to compromise by watering down and/or denying the teachings of Christ while those who hate Christianity persist in their obstinate rejection of Christianity and their total opposition to any effort made by Christians to share Christian doctrine.

Incidentally, a conversion like St. Paul's is unlikely for those who hate the idea of God or those who hate and oppose every Christian moral teaching and fight those teachings tooth and nail. Yes, all things are possible with God, but God will not violate anyone's free will and force them to believe. Faith is a gift of grace, and everyone is extended sufficient grace to save their souls. However, not everyone accepts that gift of grace, and those who reject it are free to do so because our freedom is what allows us to merit the gift of salvation through cooperation with God's grace (without which salvation is impossible to any fallen human being).

St. Paul's conversion was only possible because his heart wasn't opposed to God and fixated on the renunciation of the moral law. Saul of Tarsus loved God and his zeal for the God of Israel combined with his genuine ignorance of the truth about Jesus Christ prior to his conversion were the reasons for his persecution against Christianity. Jesus appeared to Him because He knew St. Paul would love Him. He knew his heart and He gave St. Paul this extraordinary grace for the good of the whole Church.

I'm not saying that heretics, apostates, and obstinate sinners who habitually commit mortal sin cannot be reached by God's grace and experience conversion. I am merely saying that the interior disposition of such people renders such conversion difficult and unlikely because their inward orientation is turned against God. They have (to one degree or another) heard the teachings of Jesus Christ, but for some reason, they have recoiled in hatred at the sound of these teachings. Although it is possible the messenger or messengers who presented some of these people with these teachings scandalized them in some way (through hypocrisy, a distorted presentation of Christian doctrine, physical or mental abuse, etc.) such people aren't the ones I'm talking about, since God's justice will recognize the obstacles that hinder their faith and if there is the smallest crack in their hardened hearts that remains open to the truth, He can reach such people through grace and work the miracle of conversion. However, if a person loves themselves more than God to the point that they exclude God, or in essence, want to be God, wanting to be (themselves) the final authority on what is good and what is evil, it is very hard for such a person to have the capacity to be receptive to God's saving grace, and God will not force it on them. He will not save them in spite of their own rejection of Him and opposition to Him. If such people are also attached to and habitually commit mortal sin, their intellect is further darkened and their will is further weakened, making it even more difficult for them to accept God's grace.

I know your works: you are neither cold nor hot. Would that you were cold or hot! So, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you out of my mouth. For you say, I am rich, I have prospered, and I need nothing; not knowing that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind, and naked. Therefore I counsel you to buy from me gold refined by fire, that you may be rich, and white garments to clothe you and to keep the shame of your nakedness from being seen, and salve to anoint your eyes, that you may see. Those whom I love, I reprove and chasten; so be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any one hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me. (Revelation 3:15-20)
If someone rejects the notion of sin, how can they turn to the Savior? If someone refuses to admit they are sick, how can they turn to a doctor to be healed?

That is why it is why the side of darkness, namely the demons (the enemies of all human beings who are ultimately behind the campaign to lead us all away from God and into hell) work so diligently to instill doubt in our minds as to God's existence, instill a false sense of comfort and security that God will not condemn us if they can't convince us He does not exist, constantly distract us with the cares and concerns of this life, and with vanities, entertainments, and other ephemeral things, distorting our perceptions of the good things that God has created so that our weakened, warring, concupiscent passions will ignore the voice of reason and deny that we are fallible, flawed, fragile, weak, earthen vessels who must consider everything in the light of eternity and constantly pray and keep our eyes fixed on God if we hope to avoid the snares and entanglements along the straight, narrow, and difficult road to salvation which cannot be found without God's grace and which we will wander from if we fix our gaze on anything but Him for any length of time.

That is why Jesus taught that we must pray without ceasing:

And he told them a parable, to the effect that they ought always to pray and not lose heart. (Luke 18:1)
"Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened. Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent? If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him!" (Matthew 7:7-11)
"Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few. "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits. "Not every one who says to me, `Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then will I declare to them, `I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.'" (Matthew 7:13-23)
Why some people freely choose to reject God and others choose to turn to Him and repent is something God understands, but we cannot fully understand in this life. There is a reason the Church speaks of "the mystery of iniquity".

Consider these passages from Sacred Scripture on the nature of sin, God's grace, some of the types of sin Christians must recognize as leading to damnation unless there is repentance and conversion, the suffering Christ foretold that faithful Christians would endure, the opposition faithful Christians will experience, the false teachings and philosophies which seek to rationalize and even justify sin presented by people outside and inside the Church that Christians must avoid, the constant call to conversion from God, and the mysteries of the human heart with respect to hearing and answering God's call, to help you discern who is really attempting to hijack Christianity:

The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately corrupt; who can understand it? "I the LORD search the mind and try the heart, to give to every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his doings." (Jeremiah 17:9)
This is an evil in all that is done under the sun, that one fate comes to all; also the hearts of men are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live, and after that they go to the dead. (Ecclesiastes 9:3)
Why will you still be smitten, that you continue to rebel? The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. (Isaiah 1:5)
Make the heart of this people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed." (Isaiah 6:10)
"Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves. Beware of men; for they will deliver you up to councils, and flog you in their synagogues, and you will be dragged before governors and kings for my sake, to bear testimony before them and the Gentiles. When they deliver you up, do not be anxious how you are to speak or what you are to say; for what you are to say will be given to you in that hour; for it is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you. Brother will deliver up brother to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death; and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved. When they persecute you in one town, flee to the next; for truly, I say to you, you will not have gone through all the towns of Israel, before the Son of man comes. "A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a servant above his master; it is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher, and the servant like his master. If they have called the master of the house Be-el'zebul, how much more will they malign those of his household." (Matthew 10:16-24)
"With them indeed is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah which says: `You shall indeed hear but never understand, and you shall indeed see but never perceive. For this people's heart has grown dull, and their ears are heavy of hearing, and their eyes they have closed, lest they should perceive with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn for me to heal them.' But blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear. Truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it." (Matthew 13:14-17)
And when Jesus heard it, he said to them, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick; I came not to call the righteous, but sinners." (Mark 2:17)
"For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, fornication, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, envy, slander, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a man." (Mark 7:21-23)
And when he drew near and saw the city he wept over it, saying, "Would that even today you knew the things that make for peace! But now they are hid from your eyes. For the days shall come upon you, when your enemies will cast up a bank about you and surround you, and hem you in on every side, and dash you to the ground, you and your children within you, and they will not leave one stone upon another in you; because you did not know the time of your visitation." (Luke 19:41-44)
Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs which he did; but Jesus did not trust himself to them, because he knew all men and needed no one to bear witness of man; for he himself knew what was in man. (John 2:23-24)
"You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks according to his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But, because I tell the truth, you do not believe me." (John 8:44-45)
"Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter the sheepfold by the door but climbs in by another way, that man is a thief and a robber; but he who enters by the door is the shepherd of the sheep. To him the gatekeeper opens; the sheep hear his voice, and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out. When he has brought out all his own, he goes before them, and the sheep follow him, for they know his voice. A stranger they will not follow, but they will flee from him, for they do not know the voice of strangers."
This figure Jesus used with them, but they did not understand what he was saying to them.

So Jesus again said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who came before me are thieves and robbers; but the sheep did not heed them. I am the door; if any one enters by me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy; I came that they may have life, and have it abundantly. I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep. He who is a hireling and not a shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf snatches them and scatters them. He flees because he is a hireling and cares nothing for the sheep. I am the good shepherd; I know my own and my own know me, as the Father knows me and I know the Father; and I lay down my life for the sheep." (John 10:1-15)


"I have said all this to you to keep you from falling away. They will put you out of the synagogues; indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God. And they will do this because they have not known the Father, nor me." (John 16:1-3)
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles.
Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameful acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. They were filled with all (kinds of) unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, and malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips, backbiters, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, implacable, unmerciful. Though they know God’s decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them. (Romans 1:18-32)


No temptation has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, that you may be able to endure it. (1 Corinthians 10:13)
Now this I affirm and testify in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their minds; they are darkened in their understanding, alienated from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, due to their hardness of heart; they have become callous and have given themselves up to licentiousness, greedy to practice every kind of uncleanness. You did not so learn Christ! – assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus. Put off your old nature which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful lusts, and be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and put on the new nature, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness. (Ephesians 4:17-24)
But fornication and all impurity or covetousness must not even be named among you, as is fitting among saints. Let there be no filthiness, nor silly talk, nor levity, which are not fitting; but instead let there be thanksgiving. Be sure of this, that no fornicator or impure man, or one who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no one deceive you with empty words, for it is because of these things that the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not be joint-partakers with them, for once you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord; walk as children of light (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true), and try to learn what is pleasing to the Lord. (Ephesians 5:3-10)
For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is the belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. But our commonwealth is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power which enables him even to subject all things to himself. (Phillipians 3:17-21)
But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their licentiousness, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled. And in their greed they will exploit you with false words; from of old their condemnation has not been idle, and their destruction has not been asleep. For if God did not spare the angels when they sinned, but cast them into hell and committed them to pits of nether gloom to be kept until the judgment; if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven other persons, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly; if by turning the cities of Sodom and Gomor'rah to ashes he condemned them to extinction and made them an example to those who were to be ungodly; and if he rescued righteous Lot, greatly distressed by the licentiousness of the wicked (for by what that righteous man saw and heard as he lived among them, he was vexed in his righteous soul day after day with their lawless deeds), then the Lord knows how to rescue the godly from trial, and to keep the unrighteous under punishment until the day of judgment, and especially those who indulge in the lust of defiling passion and despise authority. (2 Peter 2:1-10)
Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted with evil and he himself tempts no one; but each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin; and sin when it is full-grown brings forth death. (James 1:13-15)
Now the serpent was more subtle than any other wild creature that the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God say, `You shall not eat of any tree of the garden'?" And the woman said to the serpent, "We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden; but God said, `You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, neither shall you touch it, lest you die.'" But the serpent said to the woman, "You will not die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil." So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, and he ate. Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves aprons. (Genesis 3:1-7)
There are people whose hearts are fixed in evil. Some are only temporarily lost and they will come to the Lord when they hear him call, but some have heard the seductive voice within them, a voice that has its origins in the spirit of this world, the concupiscence of the flesh, or in temptations from fallen angels (demons), and they have seen real or perceived goods which they know they can take for themselves despite the fact that such real or perceived goods cannot be taken in the manner in which they are considering without offending God, who is the source of all good things. They perceive God's gifts, but ignore the fact that no good thing they consider can exist without God's Almighty power calling it into being and holding it in existence. They ignore the fact that they are not the cause of their own being and that the good that is their own existence is also wholly dependent upon God. They see God's gifts and even their own existence as things that can be had without considering Him, as though all things that exist are independent of Him, or as though the truth about all things must conform to their own desires. They hear the seductive voice within them calling their attention to the forbidden fruit and somewhere, from deep inside them, their heart whispers, "Yes!"

Senator Obama wants Christians to ignore the fact that elective abortion is murder and forget that God has said, "You shall not kill". (Deuteronomy 5:17)

Senator Obama wants Christians to pretend that Jesus never said, "If you would enter life, keep the commandments." (Matthew 19:17)

[Note: Before the anti-war crowd tries to whitewash the evil of supporting legal, elective abortion by pointing to the Iraq war, remember that "You shall not kill" doesn't mean that we can't kill anything or anyone under any circumstances (otherwise we couldn't eat plants or meat). It doesn't mean that you can't execute the wicked or go to war either, since God commands the execution of wicked people repeatedly throughout the Old Testament and he also commands his people to go to war in the Old Testament. "You shall not kill" means you shall not murder, and murder is the direct and deliberate killing of an innocent human being, which was not the intention of the Iraq war and which is contrary to the mission of the soldiers in the Iraq war, so the Iraq war does not justify or excuse supporting a party that supports legal, elective abortion. Even if you maintain that the Iraq war is an unjust war, you can't justify bad behavior or supporting those engaging in bad behavior (the abortion on demand platform of the Democratic party) by pointing to real or perceived bad behavior on the part of others (such as the Iraq war campaign headed by Republican President George W. Bush an supported by many Americans from both political parties).]

Senator Obama wants Christians to ignore the many, many passages of Sacred Scripture that make it clear that sex is to be reserved to a union of one man and one woman united in marriage until death and which explicitly condemn sexual activity outside of such a union (including homosexual activity).

He wants Christians to ignore these teachings of Christ and His apostles which affirm the moral law described in the Old Testament for the sake of "unity".

The choice is yours, but consider this last passage:

Many of his disciples, when they heard it, said, "This is a hard saying; who can listen to it?" But Jesus, knowing in himself that his disciples murmured at it, said to them, "Do you take offense at this? Then what if you were to see the Son of man ascending where he was before? It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and life. But there are some of you that do not believe." For Jesus knew from the first who those were that did not believe, and who it was that would betray him. And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." After this many of his disciples drew back and no longer went about with him. Jesus said to the twelve, "Do you also wish to go away?" Simon Peter answered him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life; and we have believed, and have come to know, that you are the Holy One of God." (John 6:60-69)
Jesus let those who ceased to believe in Him walk away and He did not compromise His teachings to bring them back or promote "unity". He promised suffering and persecution to his followers and the opposition of the world.

That is not the soft message of sweetness, tolerance, acceptance, diversity, and understanding many inside and outside Christianity would have us believe to be the teachings of Christ, but that's because those who present that counterfeit doctrine and counterfeit Christ have had another agenda for a long time.

The truth is: If you are finding it easy to be a Christian, you're doing something wrong.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, June 25, 2007 at 06:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (19) | TrackBack (1)

Thursday, June 21, 2007
Time Magazine - Joe Kennedy's First Marriage: Still On
The Holy See has overturned the declaration of nullity granted to Joe Kennedy of his marriage to Sheila Rauch.

The original declaration of nullity created quite a bit of controversy, as well as accusations that the annulment process is really just "divorce Catholic-style", once Sheila Rauch began an effort to demonstrate the marriage was, in fact, valid.

And Sheila Rauch was right.

Here's the story: Joe Kennedy's First Marriage: Still On

Here's a section of the article:

The most controversial "marriage that never was" in recent U.S. political history is back. Sources tell TIME that the Vatican has reversed the annulment of Joseph P. Kennedy II's marriage to Sheila Rauch. The annulment had been granted in secrecy by the Catholic Church after the couple's 1991 no-fault civil divorce. Rauch found out about the de-sanctification of their marriage only in 1996, after Kennedy had been wedded to his former Congressional aide, Beth Kelly, for three years.
The annulment was the subject of Rauch's 1997 book Shattered Faith, which lambasted her ex-husband and was severely critical of the Catholic Church's proceedings, which made the marriage (which had produced twin boys) null and void in the eyes of the church. Rauch argued that Kennedy was able to unilaterally "cancel" nearly 12 years of marriage because of his clan's influence in the church. Kennedy argued at the time that the annulment was the right thing to do in religious terms. Few observers thought the appeal to Rome by Rauch, an Episcopalian, had a chance against the well-connected Kennedy. With women's groups loudly on Rauch's side, the controversy may have contributed to Kennedy's decision to give up his plans to seek re-election to Congress in 1998.

Reached by TIME in her Massachusetts home on Tuesday, Rauch said that she had just recently been informed by Boston Archdiocese officials of her successful appeal. "I am very pleased," she told TIME. "There was a real marriage. It was a marriage that failed, but as grown-ups we need to take responsibility for that. The [annulment] process was dishonest, and it was important to stand up and say that." But Rauch says she worries that the practice, particularly in the U.S., of giving what she called "easy annulments" will continue. "They don't give people a fair defense. The Boston Archdiocese doesn't even tell you that you can appeal to Rome." Reached by TIME, Kennedy's office provided no reaction from the former Congressman.
Erroneously dubbed "Catholic divorce," an annulment in fact holds that a failed marriage was never valid in the eyes of the Church. With divorce strictly prohibited in Catholicism, annulments allow Catholics to remarry before a priest and continue receiving the sacraments. Several years after his 1991 civil divorce to Rauch, Kennedy obtained an annulment from a Church tribunal in Massachusetts so he could have a Church ceremony with Kelly. The couple had already been married in a 1993 civil ceremony, but needed the Roma Rota appeals tribunal at the Vatican to uphold the Massachusetts annulment verdict before they could be married by a priest. Now with Rauch's successful appeal, that cannot happen, unless Kennedy wins a counter-appeal.

The Roma Rota's ruling, written in Latin, was reached in 2005, and had been kept secret while the official written notice was being prepared, said a source in Rome familiar with the case. Rauch's successful appeal effectively reinstates the Kennedy-Rauch marriage in the eyes of the Vatican. The case once again highlights this unique Catholic Church proceeding. Some 75% of annulments each year are from the United States, where there are an estimated 8 million divorced and remarried Catholics. The subject came up in the 2004 Presidential campaign after word spread that John Kerry had obtained an annulment of his first marriage. Another prominent Catholic who has had a marriage annulled is former New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, who is now running for the Republican Presidential nomination.


This decision is a very good thing.

The Holy See under both Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI has long maintained that the annulment process has been abused, especially in the United States.

I personally know orthodox Catholic priests and lay people who sit on marriage tribunals where they have witnessed these tribunals declaring marriages that are most probably valid as invalid, despite their own objections.

In the Diocese of Orange, the former head of the tribunal left the priesthood to get married.

Although the abysmal catechesis in the United States has wreaked havoc, it is puzzling how Catholics can frequently enter invalid marriages if they are properly prepared by the priest who marries them (barring dishonesty on the part of one or both parties when entering the marriage).

If so many priests are incompetent in assisting couples in their preparation for marriage, how else might they be failing in terms of transmitting the authentic teachings of the Church?

Apparently Joe Kennedy was initially able to get something King Henry VIII was unable to get, the dissolution of a valid marriage with the official sanction of legitimate Church authority.

That's something to think about.

Thanks be to God that the Holy See has rectified the matter.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, June 21, 2007 at 09:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (39) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, June 06, 2007
Divine Intervention? The Third Republican Debate: Lightning Strikes As Rudy Giuliani Defends His Pro-Abortion Views


Here are some more highlights from the debate:



Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, June 06, 2007 at 07:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)
Michael Rose: Heroes, Holiness & Mystical Phenomena


(Click the image to see the whole photo)

I was very excited to read this excellent article by Michael Rose and immediately wanted to blog about it. It's not often that I get a chance to blog about a television show I love and plug Michael Rose, a man whose work I admire and whose opinion I respect.

First, I will briefly mention my love for NBC's Heroes. It's a show about superheroes. It's a lot like watching a well-done comic book on television. It's not perfect, and it has a bit of violence and graphic gore (the main villain this season steals people's powers by cutting open people's heads and eating their brains, though we never see the actual eating part), but it's a great show.

Here's Wikipedia's description: Heroes

The show tells the story of several people who "thought they were like everyone else... until they woke with incredible abilities" such as telepathy, time travel and flight. These people soon realize they have a role in preventing a catastrophe and saving mankind. The series follows the writing style of American comics with short, multi-episode story arcs that build upon a larger, more encompassing arc.
Here's the official NBC page for the show: Heroes

If you haven't seen the show, you can watch the whole season online. You can watch later episodes by clicking where it says "choose an episode". (Don't be put off by the "God is a cockroach" line in the pilot.) Click here to watch: Heroes (Full Episodes)

Now for Michael Rose's article...

Here's a section from what Mr. Rose wrote:

Recently, NBC wrapped up its first season of an interesting television series called Heroes . For those who haven’t seen it --and you should see it--the show centers around a group of people who discover they have special abilities beyond the ordinary, including superhuman powers like telepathy, time travel, flight, invisibility, the ability to walk through walls, to heal, and to paint the future, among others. These “superheroes,” one by one, come to realize that they each have a particular role to play in preventing a catastrophe and “saving the world.” It is science fiction, to be sure. But this concept is not without precedence in the real world throughout history. The Catholic Church has had its own “heroes” – like the Cure d’Ars, Padre Pio, Joseph of Cupertino and Mother Teresa of Calcutta--who were, at least through parts of their lives, blessed with “supernatural powers.” The Church calls them “mystical phenomena,” and those saints who have wielded these inexplicable powers understood their role in advancing the kingdom of God.
Though the modern world is fascinated by the idea of men and women possessing unique superhuman powers, as evidenced by the huge success of Heroes and movies like Spiderman and Unbreakable , the modern world has little room to accommodate the idea of mystical phenomena, especially in connection with religious concepts like evil and holiness, blessings and curses. Even in a time when belief in UFOs, Elvis sightings, and animated gnomes is on the increase, most people remain highly skeptical of any claims of mystical phenomena in the lives of the saints. They believe these claims are in the realm of myth, even though numerous examples of mystical phenomenon have been studied and examined by modern scientific methods.

It is instructive to note that the Catholic Church has always approached claims of mystical phenomena with a healthy dose of skepticism. By design, Church officials throughout history have not accepted at face value any phenomenon which purports to be from God. The Church carefully weighs all the circumstances, evidence and personalities of those connected with the phenomenon to determine whether or not there is any possibility of either a natural explanation or a psychological explanation such as hysteria, schizophrenia, or some other form of insanity. The Church also attempts to determine whether or not there is the possibility of fraud or demonic activity, both of which are not uncommon.

If, after all, the facts and evidence of a particular mystical phenomenon lend themselves to God’s supernatural intervention, then the Church will accept a particular phenomenon as having no other explanation than the supernatural. In many cases, especially with phenomena that are specifically connected with manifestations of holiness, the Church waits until after the person dies to determine that the phenomena associated with them were truly manifestations of their heroic virtue and holiness. Then and only then will the Church confirm that a particular phenomenon, even when witnessed by hundreds of people, was truly from God.


The article then discusses mystical phenomena, namely: levitation, Eucharistic fasts, smelling sin, the odor of sanctity, and bilocation.

Here's the whole article: Heroes, Holiness & Mystical Phenomena

Books by Michael Rose:

The Renovation Manipulation: The Church Counter-Renovation Handbook

In Tiers of Glory: The Organic Development of Catholic Church Architecture Through the Ages

Ugly As Sin: Why They Changed Our Churches from Sacred Places to Meeting Spaces and How We Can Change Them Back Again

Goodbye! Good Men: How Catholic Seminaries Turned Away Two Generations of Vocations From the Priesthood

Are 'gay' priests the problem? (Reprint) : An article from: Catholic Insight

Priest: Portraits of Ten Good Men Serving the Church Today

Benedict XVI: The Man Who Was Ratzinger

There are some great books available that discuss mystical phenomena.

This one is excellent: Spiritual Theology, by Fr. Jordan Aumann, O.P.

What is even more excellent is that this book is available online: Spiritual Theology, by Fr. Jordan Aumann, O.P.

Here's a description of the book:

In Spiritual Theology Father Jordan Aumann dispels the common misconception that ascetical and mystical theology is for the select few. He reminds us that "the real purpose of the study of the spiritual life is not to produce scholars but to form holy Christians." Basing much of his work on St. Thomas Aquinas, St. John of the Cross, and St. Teresa, Father Aumann proves that Christian perfection consists especially in charity, a charity richly rewarded in spiritual graces.
He presents the most complete and systematic treatment of spiritual theology since Vatican II. Comprehensive in scope, it meets the needs of seminarians, professors of spiritual theology, spiritual directors, and retreat masters. This classic will also appeal to the educated reader seeking a richer and fuller spiritual life.


Here is another great book: The Spiritual Life: A Treatise on Ascetical and Mystical Theology by Rt. Rev. Adolphe Tanquerey SS.D.D

Here's a description of the book:

The Spiritual Life is undoubtedly the finest, most comprehensive and best respected one volume treatise on the spiritual life ever written. Clear, thorough, easy to read, orthodox, authoritative, beautifully organized, logically developed, lively and practical, the book covers the whole field of spirituality. Based on Sacred Scripture, the Fathers and Doctors of the Church, especially St. Thomas Aquinas, as well as other great Saints and spiritual writers of all ages. Impr. 771 pgs
The works of Rev. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P. are also excellent. You can order them here: TAN Books: Rev. Reginald Garrigou-Lagrange Collection

Here are some great books that detail the miracles and mystical phenomena in the Church and in the lives of the saints:

Forty Dreams Of St. John Bosco (From St. John Bosco's Biographical Memoirs) by St. John Bosco

Mysteries Marvels and Miracles In the Lives of the Saints by Joan Carroll Cruz

Eucharistic Miracles And Eucharistic Phenomenon in the Lives of the Saints by Joan Carroll Cruz

The Incorruptibles (A study of Incorruption in the Bodies of Various Saints) by Joan Carroll Cruz

Miraculous Images of Our Lord by Joan Carroll Cruz

Angels And Devils by Joan Carroll Cruz

Saints Who Raised the Dead (True Stories of 400 Resurrection Miracles) by Rev. Albert J. Hebert

Any thoughts? Book or web page recommendations are also welcome!

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, June 06, 2007 at 06:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, June 04, 2007
Hitchens vs. Hitchens: Peter Hitchens Responds To His Brother Christopher's Atheistic Book: "God Is Not Great"


Peter Hitchens disagrees with his brother, Christopher Hitchens' book, "God Is Not Great", and has written a book review that demonstrates an admittedly ignorant, confused, and hesitant Christian faith in response to his brother's unabashed, religion-hating atheism.

At least Peter Hitchens made an effort. I suppose that counts for something, but arguments against religion in general and Christianity in particular, made by men like Christopher Hitchens, can't afford to sound uncertain.

Here's the story: Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Here's a section of the article:

Christopher is an atheist. I am a believer. He once said in public: "The real difference between Peter and myself is the belief in the supernatural.
"I’m a materialist and he attributes his presence here to a divine plan. I can’t stand anyone who believes in God, who invokes the divinity or who is a person of faith."

I don’t feel the same way. I like atheists and enjoy their company, because they agree with me that religion is important.

I liked and enjoyed this book, and recommend it to anybody who is interested in the subject. Like everything Christopher writes, it is often elegant, frequently witty and never stupid or boring.

I also think it is wrong, mostly in the way that it blames faith for so many bad things and gives it no credit for any of the good it may have done.

I think it misunderstands religious people and their aims and desires. And I think it asserts a number of things as true and obvious that are nothing of the sort.

At the heart of this book are two extraordinary, bold statements. One is a declaration of absolute faith, faith that religion has got it wrong, a mental thunderbolt of unbelief.

Christopher describes how at the age of nine he concluded that his teacher’s claim that the world must be designed was wrong. "I simply knew, almost as if I had privileged access to a higher authority, that my teacher had managed to get everything wrong."

At the time of this revelation, he knew nothing of the vast, unending argument between those who maintain that the shape of the world is evidence of design, and those who say the same world is evidence of random, undirected natural selection.

It’s my view that he still doesn’t know all that much about this interesting dispute. Yet at the age of nine, he "simply knew" who had won one of the oldest debates in the history of mankind.

It is astonishing, in one so set against the idea of design or authority in the universe, how often he appeals to mysterious intuitions and "innate" knowledge of this kind, and uses religious language such as "awesome" – in awe of whom or what?

Or "mysterious". What is the mystery, if all is explained by science, the telescope and the microscope? He even refers to "conscience" and makes frequent thunderous denunciations of various evil actions.

Where is his certain knowledge of what is right and wrong supposed to have come from?

How can the idea of a conscience have any meaning in a world of random chance, where in the end we are all just collections of molecules swirling in a purposeless confusion?

If you are getting inner promptings, why should you pay any attention to them? It is as absurd as the idea of a compass with no magnetic North. You might as well take moral instruction from your bile duct.

Two pages later, speaking for atheists in general, he announces: "Our belief is not a belief."

To which one can only reply: "Really? And that thing in the middle of your face. I suppose that’s not a nose, either?"

Christopher is not tentative about his view on God. He describes himself as an "anti-theist", so certain of his, er, faith that he wars with bitter mockery against those who doubt his truth.

Well, I wish I were as certain about any of these things as Christopher is about his anti-creed.

He reminds me rather more of the bearded Muslim sages of the Deoband Islamic university in India I met last year, than of the cool, thoughtful Anglicanism that we were both more or less brought up in.

For the purposes of this book, religion is identified as a fanatical certainty. No doubt there are plenty of zealots who suffer from this problem.

But it is obvious to anyone that vast numbers of believers in every faith are filled with doubt, and open to reason. The Church of England’s greatest martyr, Thomas Cranmer, was burned at the stake for changing his mind once too often.

The noblest thinker of that Church, Richard Hooker, enthroned reason, alongside tradition and scripture, as one of the governing principles of faith, and warned against crude literal use of the Bible to justify or prohibit any action.

Yet Christopher repeatedly asserts that believers "claim to know", not just to know, but to know everything. This simply is not true. Nor do we take the Bible literally.

I never imagined that scripture had the fact-checked authenticity of, say, an account in The New York Times – though as we know even that grand newspaper sometimes publishes made-up stories without realising it.

Did the Supper at Emmaus really take place? How I hope that it did, but I do not know that it did, in the way that I know a British soldier has recently been flown home dead from Basra or Helmand, or even in the way that I know that another such soldier will soon make the same sad journey.

Many decades have passed since I fancied the story of Adam and Eve was literal truth, if I ever did. Rather more recently I have realised the great warning against human arrogance that is contained in it, the serpent’s silky promise that if we reject the supposedly foolish, trivial restrictions imposed on us by an interfering, jealous nuisance of a God, then we shall be liberated.

As the serpent promises: "Ye shall be as gods." These may be the most important words in the whole Bible.

Take the enticing satanic advice, and you arrive, quite quickly, at revolutionary terror, at the invention of the atom bomb, at the torture chamber and the building of concentration camps for those unteachable morons who do not share your vision of a just world.


Sigh. Where to begin?

How about with some links to better defenses about the existence of God and the historicity and inerrancy of Sacred Scripture?

Twenty Arguments For The Existence Of God

Summa Theologica: First Part: Question Two: The Existence Of God

Free From All Error: Authorship, Inerrancy, Historicity of Scripture, Church Teaching, and Modern Scripture Scholars

Catholic Apologetics Today: Answers to Modern Critics

Commentary on Genesis

Historicity of Gospels

The Marks Of The Church:

Questions and Answers about the Marks and Attributes of the Church

The Fifteen Features Of The True Church (developed by St. Robert Bellarmine)

Now let's examine some of the accomplishments of the Catholic Church:

There are thousands of canonized Saints who have lived lives of exemplary holiness and virtue. (Butler's Lives Of The Saints recorded the lives of 2,565 in 1956.)

The Holy Catholic Church: the Communion of Saints

Biographies Of The Saints

More Biographies Of The Saints

In 1992 the Catholic Church had:

- 5,478 Hospitals with 4,500 million patients treated
- 27,281 Homes for the aged, homeless, and handicapped
- 7,102 Orphanages
- 9,293 Nurseries
- 97,823 Special Centers for Social Services
- 8,216 Matrimonial Advice Centers
- 793 Leprosariums
- 80,612 Elementary and Primary Schools
- 6,400 Colleges and Universities

In the United States, in 1993, the Church ran 606 hospitals with 54 million patients treated; 1,592 Specialized Homes; 188 Orphanages took care of 75,890 children; 2,115 Centers for Social Services helped 20 million people; 7,136 Elementary Schools with 2 million students; 1,248 High Schools with 603,679 students; 227 Colleges and Universities with 643,127 students; 96 Schools for Handicapped with 8,764 students (The Official Catholic Directory, 1994).

How the Church Helped Build the West

List Of Catholic Philosophers And Theologians

List Of Catholic Artists

List Of Catholic Authors

List Of Catholic Converts

List Of Christian Thinkers In Science

Catholic Philosophy & Theology:

The Summa Theologica

The Catholic Encyclopedia

The Catechism of the Catholic Church

The Catechism of The Council of Trent

The Essentials Of The Catholic Faith

Where We Got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church

Father John A. Hardon, S.J. Archives

Father William Most: Theological Collection

Books For Further Reading:

How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization

How the Irish Saved Civilization

Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church: A 2,000-Year History

The Treasury of Catholic Wisdom

Handbook of Christian Apologetics: Hundreds of Answers to Crucial Questions

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, June 04, 2007 at 07:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Lax, Dissenting Catholics Complain: Archbishop Raymond Burke Is Out Of Touch (Which Means He's Doing Something Right)
I'm really beginning to like Archbishop Raymond Burke! When progressive "Catholics" start howling, it's always a good sign.

If I were a bishop, I would consider it a badge of honor that a newspaper wrote an article like this about me!

Here's the story: St. Louis Prelate Aims to Bring Flock in Line

Here's a section:

When it comes to expressing his views of church values, Roman Catholic Archbishop Raymond Burke has a habit of making headlines, not always to the satisfaction of his flock.
Burke memorably declared that he would deny Communion to Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) because the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee supports abortion rights. He fought unsuccessfully to keep singer Sheryl Crow, who supports embryonic stem cell research, from headlining an April fundraiser for the Cardinal Glennon Children's Medical Center, then resigned from the hospital foundation's board in protest.

Just this month, his office pushed St. Joseph's Academy, a Catholic high school, to renege on its invitation to Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) to deliver this year's commencement address because of her abortion-rights position, even though McCaskill's daughter was in the graduating class. McCaskill was uninvited.

At a time when significant segments of the Catholic population are breaking with the church on such issues as embryonic stem cell research and abortion, Burke is adhering to Vatican orthodoxy endorsed by Pope Benedict XVI -- and he expects the same of all Catholics in his archdiocese.

He tells his critics that he has "no agenda but the church."

Burke's decisions -- and their very public nature -- have roiled the church in St. Louis, home to more than 500,000 Catholics. While some praise Burke for firmness in an era of moral laxity, others complain that the church under his direction seems out of touch.


What a compliment!

Here's another section:

Burke "has relatively little concern for, let's say, negative reaction," said James Hitchcock, a professor at Saint Louis University who writes for the diocesan press and calls Burke "a very humble man in his personal life."
"He sees himself as being obliged to do what he thinks is the right thing, and he's not too concerned with strategy or how he might finesse the thing," Hitchcock said. "There are quite obviously deep divisions within the church. Archbishop Burke is one bishop who has chosen to confront them directly, as opposed to other bishops who may prefer to minimize them."

Following the dispute over Crow and the hospital benefit, Geri Redden, who describes herself as a pro-choice former Catholic, said she considers Burke "archaic and kind of an embarrassment. He seems to think he is back in the old days when he could really tell people how to live their lives."

Burke, 58, is a canon specialist who warns that Harry Potter books are "irreligious." He took a strong stand last year against a Missouri constitutional amendment designed to protect embryonic stem cell research, a high-profile political fight that pitted social conservatives against the likes of Crow, actor Michael J. Fox and former senator John C. Danforth (R-Mo.). He called it a moral crisis for Missouri and said taxpayer money would be spent on "intrinsically immoral research."

Voters approved the measure in November by about 50,000 votes out of 2.1 million cast.

The bishop's determination to challenge Catholic public figures was clear in his previous post, as bishop of La Crosse, Wis. Among those he contacted was Rep. David R. Obey, a long-serving Wisconsin Democrat, who traded letters with Burke after the bishop privately voiced unhappiness with Obey's votes on abortion-related issues.

Burke urged Obey to vote to deny permission to U.S. servicewomen seeking abortions in military hospitals. He also wanted him to oppose embryonic stem cell research.

"A few months ago, he wrote to me threatening to use his ecclesiastical authority to punish me if I did not conform my voting record to his view of what Catholic dogma required," Obey wrote in an essay titled "My Conscience, My Vote," in America, a Jesuit magazine. "I told him I could not do that."

While still in Wisconsin, Burke ordered Catholics not to participate in an annual hunger walk sponsored by the Church World Service because some of the proceeds paid for condoms in developing countries. It has been in St. Louis, though, that his positions – particularly the Cardinal Glennon hospital event – received the most attention.

Each year, the Catholic-run children's hospital's most profitable fundraiser is a benefit for the Bob Costas Cancer Center, named for the sports announcer. Top billing this year went to Crow and actor Billy Crystal.

When Burke, on the hospital foundation board, learned that Crow had campaigned for the Missouri stem cell amendment, he demanded that she be uninvited. The board refused, saying there would be no litmus test for people who wanted to help sick children.

Three days before the gala, Burke called a rare news conference to say he could not condone Crow's appearance. He resigned from the board, saying the singer "promotes moral evils."

"What if, for instance, there were someone appearing who we discovered was openly racist and who made statements and took actions to promote racism?" Burke asked. "Do you think that I would let that go on?"


How soon can he be placed in charge of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, May 30, 2007 at 01:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, May 27, 2007
Have A Blessed Pentecost Sunday!


Pentecost by Jean Restout II (1732)

When the time for Pentecost was fulfilled, they were all in one place together. And suddenly there came from the sky a noise like a strong driving wind, and it filled the entire house in which they were. Then there appeared to them tongues as of fire, which parted and came to rest on each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in different tongues, as the Spirit enabled them to proclaim.
Now there were devout Jews from every nation under heaven
staying in Jerusalem.
At this sound, they gathered in a large crowd,
but they were confused
because each one heard them speaking in his own language.
They were astounded, and in amazement they asked,
“Are not all these people who are speaking Galileans?
Then how does each of us hear them in his native language?
We are Parthians, Medes, and Elamites,
inhabitants of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia,
Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia,
Egypt and the districts of Libya near Cyrene,
as well as travelers from Rome,
both Jews and converts to Judaism, Cretans and Arabs,
yet we hear them speaking in our own tongues
of the mighty acts of God.” (Acts 2:1-11)


Jesus said to his disciples: “If you love me, you will keep my commandments. And I will ask the Father, and he will give you another Advocate to be with you always.
“Whoever loves me will keep my word,
and my Father will love him,
and we will come to him and make our dwelling with him.
Those who do not love me do not keep my words;
yet the word you hear is not mine
but that of the Father who sent me.

“I have told you this while I am with you.
The Advocate, the Holy Spirit whom the Father will send in my name,
will teach you everything
and remind you of all that I told you.” (John 14:15-16, 23b-26)


From the Catholic Encyclopedia: Pentecost

A feast of the universal Church which commemorates the Descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles, fifty days after the Resurrection of Christ, on the ancient Jewish festival called the "feast of weeks" or Pentecost (Exodus 34:22; Deuteronomy 16:10). Whitsunday is so called from the white garments which were worn by those who were baptised during the vigil; Pentecost ("Pfingsten" in German), is the Greek for "the fiftieth" (day after Easter).
Whitsunday, as a Christian feast, dates back to the first century, although there is no evidence that it was observed, as there is in the case of Easter; the passage in I Corinthians (16:8) probably refers to the Jewish feast. This is not surprising, for the feast, originally of only one day's duration, fell on a Sunday; besides it was so closely bound up with Easter that it appears to be not much more than the termination of Paschal tide. That Whitsunday belongs to the Apostolic times is stated in the seventh of the (interpolated) fragments attributed to St. Irenæus. In Tertullian (De bapt., xix) the festival appears as already well established. The Gallic pilgrim gives a detailed account of the solemn manner in which it was observed at Jerusalem ("Peregrin. Silviæ", ed. Geyer, iv). The Apostolic Constitutions (V, xx, 17) say that Pentecost lasts one week, but in the West it was not kept with an octave until at quite a late date. It appears from Berno of Reichenau (d. 1048) that it was a debatable point in his time whether Whitsunday ought to have an octave. At present it is of equal rank with Easter Sunday. During the vigil formerly the catechumens who remained from Easter were baptized, consequently the ceremonies on Saturday are similar to those on Holy Saturday.

The office of Pentecost has only one Nocturn during the entire week. At Terce the "Veni Creator" is sung instead of the usual hymn, because at the third hour the Holy Ghost descended. The Mass has a Sequence, "Veni Sancte Spiritus" the authorship of which by some is ascribed to King Robert of France. The colour of the vestments is red, symbolic of the love of the Holy Ghost or of the tongues of fire. Formerly the law courts did not sit during the entire week, and servile work was forbidden. A Council of Constance (1094) limited this prohibition to the first three days of the week.


Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, May 27, 2007 at 01:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
SSPX Bishop Fellay On The Moto Proprio And The State Of The Church


Part Two
Part Three
Part Four
Part Five
Part Six
Part Seven
Part Eight
Part Nine
Part Ten

Parts Six and Seven were recently featured on Rorate Caeli, and they deal specifically with:

1) Francis Cardinal Arinze [who reportedly initially torpedoed the Motu Proprio, (Quote from the bottom paragraph of this link: "But the Pope seems to have strangely little real power. He is surrounded in the Vatican by people who oppose the Latin Mass. Cardinal Arinze is on the side of the German bishops, and Cardinal Sodano still won't get out of his [former] office...") along with his secretary, who is now in Assisi]
2) The Roman Curia

3) The impending Motu Proprio on the Traditional Latin Mass

4) Angelo Cardinal Sodano [On June 22, 2006 it was announced that Benedict XVI, in accordance with Canon 354 of the Code of Canon Law, had accepted the resignation of Cardinal Sodano as Vatican Secretary of State, effective September 15, 2006. Sodano was succeeded by Tarcisio Cardinal Bertone, named Vatican Secretary of State on June 22, 2006, but has failed to vacate the Vatican apartment and offices of the Secretary of State, despite having been removed from that position in June of 2006.]

5) Archbishop Piero Marini [the controversial Master of Ceremonies for Pope Benedict XVI and Pope John Paul II]


One reader sent this e-mail message along with the links to the videos:

Latin Mass magazine this month reports at Cardinal Marini is going to finally move out of his office and on to another position. Marini's and Sodano's obstinacy is heartbreaking. The Pope for these reasons of sabotage can't govern the Church. This is real.
People have spoken in the past fearing for Benedict's life. We must increase our prayers.

I hope all of you are versed well enough in these matters of the Church that Bishop Fellay's words do not shock you, do not discourage you, but only increase your resolve to correct and educate.

For some Catholics who are not always reading about these matters, Bishop Fellay's words may cause them to say 'none of this is true, it's nonsense.' But it is not nonsense, these are, sadly, the problems experienced by Pope Benedict since his first day as Pope; these same issues afflicted John Paul II's pontificate as well, namely modern [heretical] sabotage within the Curia offices against elements of tradition favored by Popes.

As in everything in life, in business, in government, and now in the Church, we always discover inner workings that at first shock us, but then, people had been speaking of these things for many many years and we ask ourselves are we shocked because we refused to listen and hear the earlier warnings?

The USCCB is perhaps the most corrupt organization within the Church. We don't know the half of it, and we know a lot about this particular corruption.

We must increase our prayers for Pope Benedict. He is resisted at every turn in the road.

Do not think for one moment that Benedict [does not completely understand] what his remarks will mean when he speaks them to the world; e.g., his remarks in Brazil regarding excommunication, again in Brazil, regarding the Christianization of the indigenous people [Indians], and in Germany, his remarks at the University of Regensburg, regarding the problems with Islam, Mohammed. and violence. He is brilliant; clever as a fox. He speaks the truth, and if his back-up are politically-correct men [who] want to clean up his remarks, let them do so, but the world will not be able to forget the real words [first spoken by] the Pope.

Increase your prayers for Pope Benedict XVI!


Before people complain about me posting a talk by Bishop Fellay...

Yes, Bishop Fellay is an excommunicated bishop of the Society of St. Pius X, a group formed to combat the growing spread of modernism within the Church, which is, as a consequence of the excommunications, not directly affiliated with the Holy See, but whose relation to the Holy See is in question, and which has tenuous relations (at best) with the Holy See, whose rumored reunion with Rome has been in serious doubt, whose bishops were ordained (validly, but illicitly) by Monsignor Marcel Lefebvre, Archbishop-Bishop Emeritus of Tulle, without the permission of the Holy See (incurring his excommunication, along with the excommunication of the bishops he consecrated and placing those who remain in the Society of St. Pius X in jeopardy, especially in Lincoln, Nebraska, where they have been formally excomunicated), and whose often bitter proponents frequently support positions with which I do not agree (or at best overstate positions where I would concede they have valid points in ways which make me uncomfortable), but Bishop Fellay seems (to me) to be a much more reasonable man than some of the other bishops in the SSPX (namely, Bishop Williamson) and whatever may be said about the SSPX, Bishop Fellay does bring up issues that are important for the Church in these videos.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, May 27, 2007 at 11:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (48) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, May 22, 2007
Saint Rita of Cascia: Saint of the Impossible
Today is the feast of St. Rita of Cascia. (1386 - 1457) [She died on May 22nd]

St. Rita, also known as Margarita of Cascia and Rita La Abogada de Imposible is the patron saint of the impossible.

Here is her story: Saint Rita

St. Rita was born in the year 1381 in the village of Roccaporena near Cascia, Italy. Her parents, Antonio and Amata Lotti, considered her from birth a very special gift from God, for Rita was born to them as they were already advancing in age. As a young girl Rita frequently visited the convent of the Augustinian nuns of Cascia and dreamed of one day joining their community. Her parents, however, promised her in marriage, according to the custom of the day to Paolo Mancini, a good man of strong and impetuous character. Rita accepted her parents' decision, resolved to see this as God's will for her. The young couple were joined in marriage and soon twin boys were born to them. Rita found herself occupied with the typical concerns of wife, mother, and homemaker of Roccaporena, while Paolo was employed as a watchman for the town. In Cascia, as elsewhere, a great rivalry existed between two popular political factions, the Guelphs and the Ghibellines. As a minor official of the town, Paolo often found himself drawn into the conflict and the strain which this caused probably accounts for the tension which he sometimes brought into the Mancini household. Her husband was a man with a violent temper which developed into brutality. He often kicked and struck his young wife for no other reason than he might be angry for losing at gambling. By her prayer, patience, and affection, however, Rita was able to ease the stress and worry her husband experienced, but she was not able to shield him altogether from the dangers to which society exposed him.
Her two sons, despite St. Rita's influence, turned to the evil ways their father taught them.

One day as Paolo was returning home from work he was ambushed and killed. The pain which this unexpected and violent death inflicted upon Rita was only compounded by the fear she felt that her two teenage sons, moved by the unwritten law of the "vendetta," would seek to avenge their father's death. Rita's only recourse was to prayer and persuasion. Her sons died at an early age (from natural causes) a short time later, but not before they repented and received the last sacraments and were thereby removed from physical and spiritual danger. Despite the great burden she could still thank God that they had died in peace, free of the poison of murder to which hatred and revenge might have otherwise drawn them.

Now alone in the world and without family responsibilities, St. Rita once more turned to thoughts to the desired vocation of her youth, that of joining the Augustinian Nuns of Saint Mary Magdalene Monastery. Some of the religious of the community, however, were relatives of the members of the political faction considered responsible for Paolo's death, and so as not to tempt the harmony of the convent. Rita's request for admission was denied. Fortunately, she was not to be easily dissuaded from following what she knew to be God's plan for her life. She implored her three patron saints, - John the Baptist, Augustine, and Nicholas of Tolentino - to assist her, and she set about the task of establishing peace between the hostile parties of Cascia with such success that her entry into the monastery was assured.

At the age of thirty-six Rita pledged to follow the ancient Rule of Saint Augustine. For the next forty years she gave herself wholeheartedly to prayer, works of charity, striving especially to preserve peace and harmony among the citizens of Cascia. With a pure love she wanted more and more to be intimately joined to the redemptive suffering of Jesus, and this desire of hers was satisfied in an extraordinary way. One day when she was about sixty years of age, she was meditating before the image of Christ crucified as she was long accustomed to doing. Suddenly, a small wound appeared on her forehead, as though a thorn from the crown that encircled Christ's head had loosed itself and penetrated her own flesh. For the next fifteen years she bore this external sign of stigmatization and union with the Lord. In spite of the pain she constantly experienced, she offered herself courageously for the physical and spiritual well being of others.

During the last four years of her life, Rita was confined to bed and was able to eat so little that she was practically sustained by the Eucharist alone. She was nevertheless, an inspiration to her sisters in religion and to all who came to visit her, by her patience and joyful disposition despite her great suffering.

One of those who visited her some few months before her death was privileged to witness first hand the extraordinary things wrought by Rita's requests. When asked whether she had any special desires, Rita asked only that a rose from the garden of her parents' home be brought to her. It was a small favor to ask, but quite an impossible one to grant in the month of January. Nevertheless, on returning home the woman discovered to her amazement, a single brightly colored blossom on the bush just as the nun had described. Picking it, she returned immediately and presented it to Rita who gave thanks to God for this sign of love. Thus the saint of the thorn became the saint of the rose, and she whose impossible requests were granted became the advocate of all whose own requests seem impossible as well. As she breathed her last, Rita's final words to the sisters around her were, "Remain in the holy love of Jesus. Remain in obedience to the holy Roman Church. Remain in peace and fraternal charity."


Her body is on display in a glass case in the Basilica of St. Rita in Cascia, Italy. Her body has been seen in different positions in the glass case in which her remains are displayed and her eyes have opened and closed unaided.

St. Rita is the patron of: abuse victims; against loneliness; against sterility; bodily ills; Dalayap, Philippines; desperate causes; difficult marriages; forgotten causes; impossible causes; infertility; lost causes; parenthood; sick people; sickness; sterility; victims of physical spousal abuse; widows; wounds

You can learn more about St. Rita by reading this book, available online: Saint Rita of Cascia: Saint of the Impossible

St. Rita is a powerful intercessor. Because of the many miracles reported to have been wrought at her intercession she received in Spain the title of La Santa de los impossibiles.

I personally know people who have been greatly helped by her assistance. That is why I encourage you to ask her to pray for you.

Oration To The Saint Of The Impossible

O excellent St. Rita, worker of miracles, from thy sanctuary in Cascia, where in all thy beauty thou sleepest in peace, where thy relics exhale breaths of paradise, turn thy merciful eyes on me who suffer and weep! Thou seest my poor bleeding heart surrounded by thorns Thou seest, O dear Saint, that my eyes have no more tears to shed, so much have I wept! Weary and discouraged as I am, I feel the very prayers dying on my lips. Must I thus despair in this crisis of my life? O come, St. Rita, come to my aid and help me. Art thou not called the Saint of the Impossible, Advocate to those in despair? Then honor thy name, procuring for me from God the favor that I ask. (Here ask the favor you wish to obtain.) Everyone praises thy glories, everyone tells of the most amazing miracles performed through thee, must I alone be disappointed because thou hast not heard me? Ah no! Pray then pray for me to thy sweet Lord Jesus that He be moved to pity by my troubles and that, through thee, O good St. Rita, I may obtain what my heart so fervently desires. (Pray the Our Father, Hail Mary, Glory be to the Father, three times.)

Those wishing to offer a novena should repeat this prayer for nine days.



Below is an image of the incorrupt body of St. Rita:



Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, May 22, 2007 at 01:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Motu Proprio Update
The London Times Online has two articles about the impending motu proprio on the Tridentine Mass. The articles give some insight into the delay of the document's publication. However, it must be remembered that the Times isn't always accurate when reporting on religious matters.

Here they are:

Latest on Tridentine Mass

Pope set to bring back Latin Mass in face of opposition

Quote:

The return of the Tridentine Rite would represent a triumph for traditionalists and be an indication of the Pope’s determination to reinforce conservative Catholic doctrine as one of his most powerful weapons in the fight against secularism.
In Brazil last week the Pope made clear his conservative sympathies, emphasising that there could be no relaxation on the Church’s teaching on sexual ethics and abortion.

In a private audience with one leading traditionalist, Alice von Hildebrand, Pope Benedict said that he intended to publish the permission to celebrate the 16th-century rite this month.

The document had been expected earlier but is understood to have been delayed after a seven-page document of objections by German bishops was sent to the Pope.

Among other things, the Germans were anxious about a Good Friday prayer calling for the conversion of the Jews. A wider revolt by bishops’ conferences around the world would have seen off the indult, but in the end the Germans were isolated in their protest. However, when the permission is published, it is thought likely to exclude prayer for the conversion of the Jews, which leaders of the German and the British councils of Christians and Jews have spoken out against.

It could also include an “opt-out clause”, allowing bishops to prohibit it at a local level, which would placate both the German and the modernist French bishops.

Mrs von Hildebrand, 83, an author and lecturer who lives in the US, told The Times: “I know that the Pope favours the Tridentine Mass very, very much. I asked him if there was any chance that the permission would be given. He said it would be given in May.”


It is unclear if the document will still come out in May because of the German opposition, but it is coming, and that is what matters most.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, May 16, 2007 at 09:23 AM | Permalink | Comments (40) | TrackBack (0)
Mormon Doctrine Explained


I wanted to be fair, so I include below another version of the same cartoon, but this time actual Mormon doctrine is cited and quoted by a Mormon whose aim is to defend Mormon doctrine and who is critical of the cartoon. Texts citing Mormon doctrines are presented during the video in an effort to clearly demonstrate what Mormons believe. The text quibbles over some minor details, but for the most part, it confirms most of the things described in the video.



Although the text says there isn't written reference to the god of Mormonism having more than one wife, it is my understanding that polygamy is a requirement for godhood in Mormon doctrine, which would necessitate the Mormon god having more than one wife.

The Mormon belief that God has a body and is, in fact, an exalted man can be seen here: Godhood

Latter-day Saints believe that God achieved his exalted rank by progressing much as man must progress and that God is a perfected and exalted man: "God himself was once as we are now, and is an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens! That is the great secret. If the veil were rent today, and the great God who holds this world in its orbit, and who upholds all worlds and all things by his power, was to make himself visible,—I say, if you were to see him today, you would see him like a man in form—like yourselves in all the person, image, and very form as a man; for Adam was created in the very fashion, image and likeness of God, and received instruction from, and walked, talked and conversed with him, as one man talks and communes with another" (TPJS, p. 345).
Much of the LDS concept of godhood is expressed in a frequently cited aphorism written in 1840 by Lorenzo Snow, fifth President of the Church. At the time, Snow was twenty-six years old, having been baptized four years earlier. He recorded in his journal that he attended a meeting in which Elder H. G. Sherwood explained the parable of the Savior regarding the husbandman who hired servants and sent them forth at different hours of the day to labor for him in his vineyard. Snow continued, as recorded in his sister's biography of him: "The Spirit of the Lord rested mightily upon me—the eyes of my understanding were opened, and I saw as clear as the sun at noonday, with wonder and astonishment, the pathway of God and man. I formed the following couplet which expresses the revelation, as it was shown me…. As man now is, God once was: As God now is, man may be" (Eliza R. Snow, p. 46).


The infinite regression of Mormon gods is contrary to sound reason (as well as Divine Revelation). If there were an infinite regression of causes or movers, there would (by necessity) be no Prime Mover and no First Cause. This essentially denies both the existence of God and all creatures, since without a First Cause, there can be no other causes or effects, and without a Prime Mover, there can be no subsequent motion. See St. Thomas Aquinas' Summa Theologica, Book One, Article III: Whether God exists?

Here is more information on Mormonism:

Distinctive Beliefs of the Mormon Church

The Gods of the Mormon Church

The Mormon Christ

Mormonism's Baptism for the Dead

Problems with the Book of Mormon

Mormon Changes in Practice

Pro-Abortion Mormon Teaching: Abortion: Who Teaches The Truth?

Mormon History, Part One: The Appeal of Mormonism

Mormon History, Part Two: The Wacky World of Joseph Smith, And the un-Christianity of Mormon Theology

More Mormon History: Mormons

Mormon Stumpers

Quote:

"We don’t bash your church, why bash ours?"
Somehow, members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints have been persuaded by their leaders that they have always been on the receiving end of uncharitable comments and unjust accusations. From the time Joseph Smith began his work in 1820, the Mormon church has gloried in the "fact" that it is a persecuted people. For them, this is a sure sign that it is the Lord’s true church; all opposition comes ultimately from Satan. So, if you do offer a question or a criticism, be prepared for this reaction.

Many Mormons, including their hierarchy, look upon any criticism—regardless of how honest and sincere—as perverseness inspired by the Evil One. But these same individuals ignore their own past (and present) attacks on Christian churches. You might like to point out a few of these to those Mormons who say their church "never attacks other churches."

1. "I was answered that I must join none of them (Christian churches), for they were all wrong…their creeds were an abomination in [God’s] sight; that those professors were all corrupt" (Joseph Smith—History 1:19).

2. "Orthodox Christian views of God are pagan rather than Christian" (Mormon Doctrine of Deity, B. H. Roberts [General Authority], 116).

3. "Are Christians ignorant? Yes, as ignorant of the things of God as the brute beast" (Journal of Discourses, John Taylor [3rd Mormon President], 13:225).

4. "The Roman Catholic, Greek, and Protestant church, is the great corrupt, ecclesiastical power, represented by great Babylon" (Orson Pratt, Writings of an Apostle, Orson Pratt, n. 6, 84).

5. "All the priests who adhere to the sectarian [Christian] religions of the day with all their followers, without one exception, receive their portion with the devil and his angels" (The Elders Journal, Joseph Smith, ed. Vol. 1, n. 4, 60).

6. [Under the heading, "Church of the Devil," Apostle Bruce R. McConkie lists:] "The Roman Catholic Church specifically—singled out, set apart, described, and designated as being ‘most abominable above all other churches’ (I Ne. 13:5)" (Mormon Doctrine, 1958, 129).

7. "Believers in the doctrines of modern Christendom will reap damnation to their souls (Morm. 8; Moro. 8)" (Mormon Doctrine, 1966, Bruce R. McConkie, 177).

Some contemporary Mormons, embarrassed—at least publicly—by McConkie’s ranting, will respond with, "That’s only his opinion." This is disingenuous at best. Keep in mind that McConkie, who died in 1985, was raised to the level of "apostle" in the Mormon church after he had written all these things. And still today, his Mormon Doctrine is published by a church-owned publishing company and remains one of the church’s bestsellers.


Those who are unfamiliar with the Mormon Church should read Inside Mormonism: What Mormons Really Believe, by Isaiah Bennett. The book is excellent. I have read it myself. Mr. Bennet was a Catholic priest who left the priesthood and became a Mormon. He was married in the Mormon religion and was deemed worthy to worship at the temple. He and his wife became extremely disillusioned with Mormonism when they realized that Mormonsism is not a solidly pro-life religion. He is fair and respectful in his treatment of the religion and there is no hint of bitterness in what he writes. If you have questions about Mormonism, this is one of the best books around on the subject.

Here are some details about the book from Amazon.com:

"Inside Mormonism: What Mormons Really Believe" offers an unprecedented look at the Mormon religion. It is the first book offering an in-depth and objective critique of Mormonism from a Catholic perspective. Isaiah Bennett conducts a thorough, frank, and charitable investigation of Mormonism, its history and the doctrines its leaders don't want told to the public. He highlights the religion's contradictory doctrines and explains how it "packages" itself to appear Christian.
Mormonism wants to be perceived as an open, friendly, and genuinely Christian faith, but "Inside Mormonism" demonstrates Mormonism's erroneous teachings, its attacks on faithful Christians, and the strategies Mormon missionaries use to pull Catholics out of the Church.

After reading "Inside Mormonism," you will be armed with the knowledge needed to defend your faith against Mormon claims and to help family and friends see through the arguments of the missionaries. You'll discover the doctrines that the Mormon hierarchy doesn't want you to know:

Mormons believe that God the Father once was a mortal man living on another planet and that he now has a wife in heaven.

Mormons believe that if they are faithful to their religion, they too can become gods equal to God the Father.

Mormons hold that Jesus and Lucifer are "spirit brothers."

Mormons believe that dark skin is a curse.

Mormons portray their religion as pro-family, yet they permit abortion in many circumstances.

Mormons redefine words to mask non-Christian, polytheistic doctrines as Christian.

From the Publisher

Comprehensive, but easily read volume covering the history, beliefs, and practices of Mormons. In many instances this non-fiction account reads like an adventure story, as the colorful history of Joseph Smith and those who followed him is told. An eye-opening journey inside the Mormon Church, filled to the brim with documentation from Scripture, authoritative Mormon attributions, and other historical sources.


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, May 16, 2007 at 08:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)
Worth Reading: The Truth About Muhammad


Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, May 16, 2007 at 05:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (13) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, May 14, 2007
Atheist, Christopher Hitchens Says: "God Is Not Great"


Posted by Thomistic on Monday, May 14, 2007 at 09:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (74) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, May 11, 2007
Dissident Theologian, Richard McBrien Has A Feature Column In Cardinal Mahony's Newspaper, "The Tidings"
According to Wikipedia, Fr. Richard McBrien is the Crowley-O'Brien professor of Theology at the University of Notre Dame. He is a priest of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Hartford. He is the author of several books and articles discussing Catholicism. His stated scholarly interests are ecclesiology, the relationship between religion and politics, and the theological, doctrinal and spiritual facets of the Catholic church. He has written a syndicated theological column for the Catholic press. He also served as president of the Catholic Theological Society of America from 1974-1975. He was the awarded the John Courtney Murray Award for outstanding and distinguished accomplishments in theology.

McBrien has been a controversial figure in the Church in America, and is often considered to be a dissenter from Church teachings. His two volume work, Catholicism, has been a source of this controversy.

See: McBrien's 'Catholicism': what the US Bishops criticised

McBrien's third edition of Catholicism has been severely criticised by the US National Conference of Catholic Bishops' Doctrinal Committee for "certain shortcomings" as "an introductory textbook of Catholic theology." Catholicism had been the object of review by the Doctrine Committee in the early 1980s and a statement outlining the Committee's criticism of the book was issued in July 1985.
California Catholic Daily has the story on McBrien's column in The Tidings: Resurrection as myth, saints as role models, not miracle-workers

Here's a quote:

In his weekly column, published in the May 8 Tidings, the newspaper of the Los Angeles archdiocese, the Rev. Richard McBrien, a theology professor at Notre Dame University in Indiana, said they are basically just role models.
Despite his notoriety as a public dissenter from Church teaching, McBrien’s columns run in the Tidings nearly every week. Last April, a Tidings-run McBrien column explored various interpretations of the resurrection of Christ, one of which says it signifies only "the extraordinary transformation of the disciples from weak, cowardly followers of the crucified Lord into courageous proclaimers of his Gospel." Another, wrote McBrien, makes the resurrection "a myth” signifying that Jesus “still lives in those who accept him as their risen Lord." These interpretations are problematic, McBrien admitted, but so is the interpretation “given at the opposite end of the theological spectrum, namely, that the Resurrection consisted of the resuscitation of Jesus' corpse in such a literally real fashion that it could have been photographed, if the technology had existed in those days."

Now, nearly a year later, McBrien has taken on the cult of saints. To a question from the New York Times, "Why does the Church need saints in the first place?" McBrien said he answered: because saints are “models of Christian discipleship.” They are “ordinary people like all of us who have manifested extraordinary qualities of holiness.”

McBrien deplored the tendency of "too many people” looking “upon saints as miracle-workers who have the heavenly powers of curing us of our ills.” And, what’s more, “the Church itself still encourages this line of thought by making miracles the key criterion for advancement to beatification and then to canonization.”


Be sure to click the link for the rest of the article.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, May 11, 2007 at 12:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (23) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, May 02, 2007
If Only All Catholic Kids Were Like This!


USA Today has a story about a seven-year-old Catholic whiz kid who takes his Catholic faith seriously and loves baseball.

Here's the story: Got a Catholic question? Boy, 7, has the answers

Here's a quote:

James is really proud of a nearly 200-day communion streak — he hasn't missed a day since last October, when his pastor gave him a special dispensation to receive his First Communion a year and a half early.
James has amassed a knowledge and understanding of all things Catholic that would send even the most devout nun's head spinning. The Nintendo you might expect to find in his room has been displaced by a small table of statuary, crucifixes, icons, saints cards and a mini Vatican flag. Plus a few baseball cards and a Red Sox pennant.

He once gave a lecture on the life of St. Patrick to the other members of his pre-kindergarten class.

You might think it would be easy to stump a 7-year-old. Not this 7-year-old. Even the priests at St. Peter's say they can't do it.

"What are the 10 commandments?"

James spouts them back, correctly. It takes about eight seconds.

"Give me something hard," he says, "really hard!"

"OK, what's the feast day of Saint Augustine of Hippo?"

James sighs and shrugs, disappointed he didn't get something more difficult.

"Aug. 27," he says.

He stops, pauses and corrects himself. "I mean Aug. 28th. Saint Monica is the 27th." He's correct.

Sts. Peter Damascene, Basil the Great, Bonaventure, Joan of Arc, Margaret, Titus — name this kid a saint and he's got the feast day and vital stats on their life.

His favorite saint? St. James the Greater (they do have the same name, after all). Feast day? July 25.

He can also explain the joys and sorrows of Mary, how all the martyrs of the church have died, the seven deadly sins, the corporal and spiritual works of the Holy Spirit, the 14 holy helpers, and the 33 "doctors" of the church — in order, including the pope who appointed them.

Speaking of the church's most eminent theologians, who was No. 8?

James sits and thinks, rolling his eyes as if scanning reams of church history in his head. St. John Chrysostom, the doctor of preachers, he says 30 seconds later. Born in A.D. 345, to be precise.

Just to be sure, he asks his father to check. He's correct.

After a thorough 20-minute pop quiz, there just aren't any more questions.


Here's another quote:

James' parents consider him their miracle child. He was born 10 weeks premature on All Souls Day, and was given just a slight chance of surviving. Around age 3, James became infatuated with Mary, often hugging and kissing statues of her.
Since then, his mother said simply, being Catholic "is a way of life for him."


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, May 02, 2007 at 08:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, April 27, 2007
Where Is Archbishop Niederauer?: BBC To Broadcast "Gay" Mass From San Francisco


This is truly sad.

Here's the story: BBC to broadcast gay mass from San Francisco

Here are some quotes:

The BBC is to relay a 'gay Mass' from San Francisco this Sunday, the first time such a service has been broadcast.
The 50-minute Mass at the Most Holy Redeemer Catholic Church in the predominantly gay Castro district of the city will feature prayers and readings tailored for the gay community.

The church has been described as an "inspiration" to gay and lesbian Christians around the world because of its ministry to homosexuals.


...

Father Donal Godfrey, the U.S. Jesuit priest celebrating the Mass, said he was delighted the BBC was "exploring how gay people fit into the perspective of the Christian narrative".
"Being gay is not special," he said. "It's simply another gift from God who created us as rainbow people."

The recording will go out at 8.10am to two million listeners on the BBC Radio 4 Sunday Worship programme.

The preacher will be James Alison - a homosexual British Catholic theologian and author of 'Is it ethical to be Catholic? - Queer perspectives'.

Weeks after the BBC finished recording the service last October, it emerged that a transvestite group calling themselves the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence regularly staged lewd and irreverent bingo nights on the church premises.

The San Francisco archdiocese-stopped the events when it was discovered that prizes of a sexual nature were being handed out by the group, who dress as nuns.


The Curt Jester has a post on this subject here: Rainbow people

My own thoughts:

It's to be applauded that the "Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence" were stopped by the Archdiocese from continuing to stage "lewd and irreverent bingo nights on the church premises" and giving out "prizes of a sexual nature", but it is quite clear that the leadership in this parish is heterodox, since they had to know what was going on, and they are, themselves, making heterodox statements.

Where is Archbishop Niederauer?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, April 27, 2007 at 04:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (46) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, April 25, 2007
Study: Religion Is Good for Kids


A new study says children with religious parents are better behaved and better adjusted.

Here's the story: Study: Religion Is Good for Kids

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, April 25, 2007 at 10:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, April 24, 2007
Ave Maria: Bach-Gounod


Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 at 09:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Ave Maria: Schubert


Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, April 24, 2007 at 08:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, April 22, 2007
More On Limbo
Rorate Caeli has this post on the recent study on Limbo by the International Theological Commission: Tiny comment

I would first like to say that I do not deny the possibility that the theological speculation concerning the existence of the Limbo of the Unbaptized may be correct, although I will maintain that it is not a dogma, since (as Fr. John Hardon, S.J. explains) "dogmas are those doctrines which the Church proposes for belief as formally revealed by God". I would also say that it is debatable that it was ever taught as a doctrine to be definitively held. Doctrine (to quote Fr. Hardon again) is "any truth taught by the Church as necessary for acceptance by the faithful. The truth may be either formally revealed (as the Real Presence), or a theological conclusion (as the canonization of a saint), or part of the natural law (as the sinfulness of contraception). In any case, what makes it doctrine is that the Church authority teaches that it is to be believed. This teaching may be done either solemnly in ex cathedra pronouncements or ordinarily in the perennial exercise of the Church's magisterium or teaching authority".

I would posit that if the Limbo of the Unbaptized were a doctrine defined by the Church, it would make little sense for Pope Benedict XVI to have commissioned the study by the International Theological Commission in the first place.

Fr. Hardon defines Limbo in The Pocket Catholic Dictionary as follows:

Limbo - The abode of souls excluded from the full blessedness of the beatific vision, but not suffering any other punishment. They enjoy the happiness that would have been human destiny if humans had not been elevated to the supernatural order.
Catholic theology distinguishes two kinds of limbo. The limbo of the Fathers (limbus patrum) was the place where the saints of the Old Testament remained until Christ's coming and redemption of the world. The limbo of infants (limbus infantium) is the permanent state of those who die in original sin but are innocent of any personal guilt.

Regarding the limbo of infants, it is an article of the Catholic faith that those who die without baptism, and for whom the want of baptism has not been supplied in some other way, cannot enter heaven. This is the teaching of the ecumenical councils of Florence and Trent.

The Church has never defined the existence of limbo, although she has more than once supported the fact by her authority. Those who either deny that heaven is a supernatural destiny to which no creature has a natural claim, or who deny that original sin deprives a person of a right to heaven logically also deny the very possibility of limbo. On their premises there is no need of such a place. Among others who denied the existence of limbo were the Jansenists, whose theory of selective predestination excluded the need for any mediatorial source of grace, including baptism. They were condemned by Pope Pius VI as teaching something "false, rash and injurious to Catholic education," because they claimed that it was a Pelagian fable to hold that there is a place "which the faithful generally designate by the name of limbo of children," for the souls of those who depart this life with the sole guilt of original sin (Denzinger 2626). Pope Pius XII declared that "an act of love can suffice for an adult to acquire sanctifying grace and supply for the lack of baptism; to the unborn or newly born infant this way is not open" (Acta Apostolicae Sedis, XLIII, 84). At stake is the revealed doctrine that heaven is a sheer gift of divine goodness and that baptism of water or desire is necessary to enter heaven. (Etym. Latin limbo, ablative form of limbus, border.)


However, it does not follow that one must believe in the Limbo of the Unbaptized or be guilty of denying the necessity of Baptism as a logical consequence.

Almighty God can supply for what is lacking to those who, through no fault of their own, never had access to the sacrament of Baptism. Whether or not He does so is not known to us, and cannot be known with certainty in this lifetime because it is one of the innumerable mysteries which God has not definitively revealed to us, which is one of many reasons that we should not take for granted the fact that Christ explicitly taught that water Baptism is necessary for salvation.

However, to deny that God can supply Sanctifying Grace to a soul outside of the sacrament of water Baptism verges on something very like the error of Fr. Leonard Feeney (who at one time denied Baptism of Desire and Baptism by Blood, both of which are taught by the Magisterium) and to limit Divine Omnipotence simply because revealed teaching is unclear on the fate of unbaptized infants.

Although I do not deny that those who die outside the state of Sanctifying Grace cannot be admitted into the Beatific Vision, I do deny that it is necessary to posit that the absence of water Baptism necessitates the belief that God Himself is unable to supply a means of grace and mercy to those who, through no fault of their own, cannot receive water Baptism.

This does not negate the need for water Baptism any more than the fact that one can repent of mortal sin and make a perfect act of contrition, thereby meriting the restoration of Sanctifying Grace prior to the reception of the sacrament of Confession, means that one is not obligated to make use of the sacrament of Confession.

One can believe that God can supply Sanctifying Grace through another means which is unknown to us without denying the necessity of water Baptism and while firmly maintaining that Original Sin does, indeed, bar one from admittance to Heaven and the Beatific Vision. The fact that explicit Church teaching on the existence of Baptism of Desire and Baptism by Blood does not deny the necessity of water Baptism supports this notion.

The following pronouncements by Church authority are not denied by such a belief (as careful examination will bear out):

The Roman Church teaches [...] that the souls of those who depart in mortal sin or with only original sin descend immediately to hell, nevertheless to be punished with different punishments and in disparate locations...
Nequaquam sine dolore
John XXII
November 21, 1321

...the souls of those who depart this life in actual mortal sin, or in original sin alone, go down straightaway to hell to be punished, but with unequal pains.

Decree for the Greeks (Laetentur Caeli)
Ecumenical Council of Florence
July 6, 1439

[Errors of the Synod of Pistoia.] The doctrine which rejects as a Pelagian fable that place of the lower regions (which the faithful generally designate by the name of limbo of the children) in which the souls of those departing with the sole guilt of original sin are punished with the punishment of the condemned, exclusive of the punishment of fire [...] is false, rash, injurious to Catholic schools.

Auctorem Fidei
Pius VI
August 28, 1794


It does seem odd to me that those who did not have access to the sacrament of water Baptism before the time of Christ can (and many, according to the explicit teaching of Christ, will) be admitted to the Beatific Vision, but for purely legalistic reasons, those who, though no fault of their own, did not have access to the sacrament of water Baptism would not have access to a similar type of mercy from God, but I submit to whatever the authority of the Church holds as definitive.

Here are some quotes from Church Fathers: Who Can Be Saved?

Here is more on the same subject from Jimmy Akin: Baptism of Desire

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, April 22, 2007 at 03:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (32) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, April 20, 2007
Pope Benedict XVI's New Statement On Limbo
Pope Benedict XVI has approved "a church report released Friday that said there was reason to hope that babies who die without baptism can go to heaven."

Here's the story: Pope revises 'limbo' for babies

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, April 20, 2007 at 03:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (21) | TrackBack (0)
The New "Secret" English Mass Translation Is Receiving Praise
The Catholic Herald reports that "the new English translation of the Mass, which bishops and liturgical experts have been working on in secret for more than half a decade, has been published on the internet – and hailed as a triumph."

Here's the story: Widespread praise for 'dignified and joyful' new Mass translation

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, April 20, 2007 at 03:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (22) | TrackBack (0)
EWTN: Heaven - Truth In The Heart

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, April 20, 2007 at 11:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Rudy Giuliani On Abortion: "Very Good People Of Equally Good Conscience Could Come To Different Opinions"


The text below came from here: Full Rudy Context

AUDIENCE MEMBER: I have a question about the former platform in the Republican Party allowed abortion in the case of rape, incest, and life of the mother. I believe in that and I believe that because of the abortion issue in the Republican Party it is dividing this party so badly that we may not be able to elect a Republican president and I hope-I’d like to hear what your thoughts are on that.”
MAYOR GIULIANI: “What my thoughts are on the big question? I can tell you my thoughts on both.”

AUDIENCE MEMBER: “The big question.”

GIULIANI: “On the big question my thoughts are we shouldn’t allow it to do that. Electing a Republican in 2008 is so important to the war on terror, the ability to keep up an economy that’s an economy or growth, or from the point of view of what we believe as Republicans to really set us in the wrong direction. Democrats are entitled to think something different but I think that there will be a major difference in the direction of this country whether we have a Republican or Democrat in 2008 and 2009. On abortion I think we should respect each other. I think that’s what we should do and we should respect the fact that this is a very difficult moral question and a very difficult question and that very good people of equally good conscience could come to different opinions on it. My view of it is I hate abortion. I think abortion is wrong. To someone who I cared about or cared to talk to me about it and wanted my advice, the advice I would give them is not to do it and to have adoption as an option to it. When I was the Mayor adoptions went way up, abortions went down but ultimately I respect that that’s somebody else’s decision and that people of conscience can make that decision either way and you can’t put them in jail for it. (applause) And then I think our party, our party has to get beyond issues like that where we can have people who are very good people who have different views about this, they can all be Republican because our party is going to grow and we’re going to win in 2008 if we’re a party that is characterized for what we are for and not if we’re a party that’s known for what we are against. …” (Mayor Rudy Giuliani, Campaign Event, Des Moines IA, 4/14/07)


LifeNews.com has this article on Rudy's comments: Rudy Giuliani Tells Pro-Life Advocates: Get Over Abortion Issue

Here are my own thoughts:

Two people of "equally good conscience" cannot come to different views about abortion. Think about the inanity of that statement. In order to have that view, one must believe the morality of abortion is a personal preference, like whether or not someone likes brussels sprouts or sauerkraut.

The moral law is not a matter of private opinion, and two people of "equally good conscience" cannot come to different views about abortion.

Fr. John Hardon's Pocket Catholic Dictionary defines conscience as follows:

Conscience - The judgment of the practical intellect deciding, from general principles of faith and reason, the goodness or badness of a way of acting that a person now faces.
It is an operation of the intellect and not of the feelings or even of the will. An action is right or wrong because of objective principles to which the mind must subscribe, not because a person subjectively feels that way or because his will wants it that way.

Conscience, therefore, is a specific act of the mind applying its knowledge to a concrete moral situation. What the mind decides in a given case depends on principles already in the mind.

These principles are presupposed as known to the mind, either from the light of natural reason reflecting on the data of creation, or from divine faith responding to God's supernatural revelation. Conscience does not produce these principles; it accepts them. Nor does conscience pass judgment on the truths of reason and divine faith; it uses them as the premises from which to conclude whether something should be done (or should have been done) because it is good, or should be omitted (or should have been omitted) because it is bad. Its conclusions also apply to situations where the mind decides that something is permissible or preferable but not obligatory.

Always the role of conscience is to decide subjectively on the ethical propriety of a specific action, here and now, for this person, in these circumstances. But always, too, the decision is a mental conclusion derived from objective norms that conscience does not determine on its own, receiving it as given by the Author of nature and divine grace.


The conscience is simply an operation of the intellect utilizing knowledge about the morality of particular actions from the past, being done in the present, or considered for the future. It's not a feeling or a choice. One's conscience is entirely dependent upon the information within the intellect about the morality of the concrete actions being considered.

The "voice" of conscience is simply the application of one's knowledge of the moral law to concrete actions.

If a person is ignorant of the moral law their conscience may well be erroneous, although they may have reasoned things out correctly from a proper understanding of the natural law. Such an understanding is difficult where attachment to sin is involved, because sin darkens the intellect (where conscience resides) and it weakens the will (which makes it more difficult to listen to the voice of conscience and makes it more tempting to try to maintain an affected ignorance of the moral law in areas where an individual is prone to temptation).

Ignorance of the moral law diminishes culpability. There are two types of ignorance: vincible and invincible ignorance.

Invincible ignorance is when one does not know and cannot come to know the truth about one's moral obligations. Invincible ignorance nullifies culpability.

Vincible ignorance means that a person is capable of coming to knowledge of the truth about his or her moral obligations, but does not do so for one reason or another.

Affected vincible ignorance is when a person deliberately avoids learning the truth about his or her moral obligations in regard to a given matter. Affected vincible ignorance does not diminish culpability at all. In fact, the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that ignorance of this kind increases, rather than lessens, one's culpability.

An individual's conscience can be either true or erroneous, and certain or doubtful.

A true conscience is one that properly reflects the objective moral law in its grasp of the natural law and/or Divine positive law.

A false conscience (or erroneous conscience) is a conscience that is in error about the objective moral law in its grasp of both the natural law and Divine positive law.

A certain conscience involves having no doubt as to one's understanding of the objective moral law in terms of the natural law and/or Divine positive law. A certain conscience may be either true (correct) or erroneous (incorrect).

A certain conscience must be obeyed, because a certain conscience means that a person is in no doubt as to God's Will in relation to the morality or immorality of a given action. If a person violates their certain conscience, they perform an action they know (or at least firmly believe over any evidence to the contrary or due to ignorance of compelling evidence to the contrary) to be a sin. That's why one must always obey a certain conscience (even if it is an erroneous conscience). So a Protestant who believes that attending Holy Mass is a serious sin cannot go to Mass (even though he is in error) because he believes that it would offend God for Him to go to Mass. In reality, it would not, but if he were to go to Mass, he would be willing to offend God in a serious matter, and that willingness to commit what one thinks is a serious sin is, in fact, a serious sin. The sin wouldn't be in the act, but rather in the act of choosing to do what one believed without a doubt to be offensive to God (even if the act is objectively good or morally indifferent).

Progressive Catholics cling to this teaching with a devotion I can only admire, because if my devotion to God were half as fervent as the devotion Cafeteria Catholics who know anything about theology have for this one Church teaching (which they often use to negate or ignore other Church teachings, and thereby unwittingly negate their own rationale for holding the belief in the first place), I would be a great saint.

The Church's teaching about certain conscience is mistakenly understood by Catholics who reject Church teaching in one or more areas as the magic loophole that allows them to do as they please without submission to the teachings of the Church regarding the moral question being considered.

The problem is that Catholics are bound to submit to the infallible authority of the Church on matters of faith and morals.

Remember that the conscience is only an operation of the intellect. The human intellect can only contain what is extracted (learned) from external sources.

Here is what the Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches about the formation of conscience:

1783 Conscience must be informed and moral judgment enlightened. A well-formed conscience is upright and truthful. It formulates its judgments according to reason, in conformity with the true good willed by the wisdom of the Creator. The education of conscience is indispensable for human beings who are subjected to negative influences and tempted by sin to prefer their own judgment and to reject authoritative teachings.
1784 The education of the conscience is a lifelong task. From the earliest years, it awakens the child to the knowledge and practice of the interior law recognized by conscience. Prudent education teaches virtue; it prevents or cures fear, selfishness and pride, resentment arising from guilt, and feelings of complacency, born of human weakness and faults. The education of the conscience guarantees freedom and engenders peace of heart.

1785 In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path,54 we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord's Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.55


The Catechism of the Catholic Church also says:

1792 Ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching, lack of conversion and of charity: these can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct. 1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral conscience. 1794 A good and pure conscience is enlightened by true faith, for charity proceeds at the same time "from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith."60
If ignorance of Christ and his Gospel, bad example given by others, enslavement to one's passions, assertion of a mistaken notion of autonomy of conscience, rejection of the Church's authority and her teaching, and/or lack of conversion and of charity can be at the source of errors of judgment in moral conduct, as the Catechism plainly teaches, then it follows that the opposite of those things, namely, knowledge of Christ and His Gospel, acceptance of the Church's authority and teaching, submission to that same authority (rather than mistakenly asserting the erroneous notion of autonomy of conscience even over the authority of Church teaching) and a spirit of true charity and conversion conjoined with the mortification of one's passions (as opposed to being enslaved by them) is the road to a true conscience.

The Catechism refers to the authority of the Church (in both passages I cited). An authority knows more than those under it. That's why it's an authority. The Church is said to be an authority in matters of conscience and a true conscience is in conformity with the authority of the Church.

Properly formed consciences must conform to the teaching of the Church, since the Church is infallible on matters of faith and morals. Since the infallible authority of the Church must inform our consciences and Christ teaches that we must "hear the Church" and says, "he who hears you, hears Me; he who rejects you, rejects Me; he who rejects me, rejects Him Who sent me", our consciences cannot set aside the teaching of the Church or overrule the infallible authority of the Church on a matter of faith and morals.

Moreover, all true (or good) consciences will be of the same opinion, because the goodness of the conscience depends upon the truth value of the information within the intellect about the morality of concrete actions, not upon the intentions or sincerity of the individual.

Truth is when the idea in our minds conforms to the reality outside our minds.

Fr. John Hardon defines truth as follows:

Truth - Conformity of mind and reality. Three kinds of conformity give rise to three kinds of truth. In logical truth, the mind is conformed or in agreement with things outside the mind, either in assenting to what is or in denying what is not. Its opposite is error. In metaphysical or ontological truth, things conform with the mind. This is primary conformity, when something corresponds to the idea of its maker, and it is secondary conformity when something is intelligible and therefore true to anyone who knows it. In moral truth, what is said conforms with what is on one's mind. This is truthfulness and its opposite is falsehood.
If a good conscience conforms to the truth, and the truth is an idea in conformity with objective reality, then it follows logically that all true consciences will come to the same conclusions about the morality of any given action.

It is true that if a person were to have an erroneous, certain conscience due to invincible ignorance, their action would not merit punishment (even if the choice made is an objectively serious sin).

That's a pretty big "if". God will not be deceived by our rationalizations and efforts at self-delusion. If we affect ignorance and have the opportunity to know the truth, especially if we reject the opportunity or act in doubt without caring to determine whether or not our actions seriously offend God, we are responsible in the eyes of God.

One can never act with a doubtful conscience. To act with a doubtful conscience is to choose to potentially offend God (which is in the same spirit as deliberately choosing to do what one believes actually offends God).

Rudy Giuliani says he "hates" abortion, thinks it is "wrong", and would advise anyone close to him against it. Why? What's so terrible about it, Rudy? It must be an awful thing for you to "hate" it and think it is "wrong"!

If abortion is so wrong and something worthy of your hatred, Rudy, why do you think should be a civil right?

Rudy knows abortion is wrong. We know this because he has told us he thinks it is wrong. Rudy's conscience knows that abortion is an evil he deems worthy of the word "hate".

How can he believe another person of "equally good conscience" can believe abortion is good and that such a judgment is of equal value and merit?

Either abortion is good or it is not. There is no third possibility. If someone thinks elective abortion is the deliberate killing of innocent, unborn, human life, they can't respect the view that abortion is a good thing or that it should be legally available to anyone who wants one. Their conscience informs them that abortion is murder.

Asking pro-life voters to ignore the issue of abortion and respect viewpoints which threaten innocent, unborn human life essentially asks those voters to ignore their own consciences.

Question: Why does Rudy want us to ignore our consciences?

Answer: So that he can be the President of the United States.

I'm not willing to throw innocent, unborn human life to be sacrificed on the altar of convenience in order to appease Mr. Giuliani's desire to be president.

I don't think that anyone who considers killing innocent, unborn human life an important civil right is fit for political office, regardless of their positions on other issues. To think otherwise is morally repulsive.

Imagine a candidate advocating the legalization of pedophilia. Who in their right mind would care if that candidate had excellent ideas about reforming Social Security or helping people have affordable health care?

Pro-abortion candidates are not a moral option.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, April 17, 2007 at 11:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (35) | TrackBack (1)

Monday, April 16, 2007
From The London Telegraph: "There Are Many Nervous Bishops At The Moment"


The London Telegraph has published a commentary that is quite exciting to read (if you are a Traditional Catholic). The article speaks of the impending motu proprio and attempts to explain Pope Benedict XVI's motives for not instigating an immediate crackdown from the beginning of his papacy.

Here's the commentary: After a quiet and cautious start, major reforms are on their way

Here are some parts I liked:

Many popes have celebrated their 80th birthday, but few have reached this milestone in such good form as Benedict XVI. Fighting form, perhaps.
After two cautious and successful years, in which he has surprised critics by writing about God's love rather than raging against contraception and homosexuality, the Pope is preparing a series of reforms of the Catholic Church.

Just how far he will go remains to be seen. But there are many nervous bishops at the moment - especially in this country.

The election of Joseph Ratzinger on April 19, 2005, deeply shocked liberals: the Rome correspondent of one Catholic magazine burst into tears in St Peter's Square. The new Pope realised that he had enemies in the Church, and decided not to play into their hands by, for example, instigating a witch hunt against gay clergy or reinstating the Latin (Tridentine) Rite of Mass.


.....

Recently, however, it has become clear that Benedict's agenda remains essentially the same as it was when he was Cardinal Ratzinger. When he was elected, he described himself as "a humble worker in the Lord's vineyard". Where John Paul II roamed far outside the vineyard, Benedict is staying close to the soil, pulling out weeds.
Those weeds are not so much people as bad habits - rambling sermons; smug, self-centred celebrations of the Mass; ugly music and architecture that, in his opinion, insults God.

Benedict is a bit like Rudy Giuliani, the former Mayor of New York: he believes that by fixing every broken window, fining every litter-lout, a city can be transformed. But his task is immense. It will not be easy to drag the lazy old precinct captains out of the donut shop.

Last month, the Pope issued a magnificently well-written document, Sacramentum Carititatis, ignored by the English bishops, which contained explicit instructions about the greater use of Latin and plain chant. Soon, liberal bishops in Europe and America could find their loyalty really put to the test.

Benedict is rumoured to be on the verge of removing restrictions on the celebration of the ancient Tridentine Rite, which liberals see as elitist. For two years, Catholics have wondered what sort of papacy this will turn out to be. Now they are about to find out.


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, April 16, 2007 at 09:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (54) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, April 15, 2007
Time Magazine: A Step Backward for Pope Benedict?


Time Magazine demonstrates a good deal of ignorance with this article lamenting the impending motu proprio and Pope Benedict's doctrinal orthodoxy: A Step Backward for Pope Benedict?

When I read things like this, I always shake my head in disbelief:

Eighteen months ago, one Rome-based, progressive cleric had said he was "surprised to see that [Benedict] seems to be open to hear new ideas." But today, the same priest is disappointed. There has been no sign of any of the hoped-for reforms: overturning the ban on communion for divorced and remarried Catholics, reconsidering the celibacy requirement for priests, allowing gays in seminaries, or a softening of the condom ban to allow for distribution in AIDS-ravaged Africa. The release last month of the Pope's final document on what had seemed to be a convivial and intellectually open October 2005 bishops' meeting on the Eucharist is a good example of the Pontiff's approach. According to a senior Church official who participated: "He took all that debate of the Synod, and then gave us a document that simply defends the status quo." This same official acknowledges a bit of past excessive optimism on Benedict: "People were hoping that with his intellectual acumen and understanding of theology, he'd be in a position to make some of these changes. Unfortunately, at this point, I don't think we'll see any of them."
Who in the hell is this Rome-based "progressive" cleric? He's obviously not a faithful Catholic, whoever he is, and he is either ignorant of Church teaching (which is possible, but unlikely) or he is insidiously preying on the ignorance of non-Catholics (or poorly catechized Catholics) in the media.

Moreover, I can't understand the hubris of "progressives" (inside and outside the Church) clamoring for the Pope (and Catholics) to abandon Church teaching (which means ignoring Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and the Living Magisterium and denying the authority, infallibility, and indissoluability of the Church).

I thought "progressives" (liberals) were supposed to be sensitive and respectful of the beliefs of others?

Don't they realize they may as well be asking when the Jews will "get with the times" and accept that Jesus is the Messiah and the Son of God, accept the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and embrace Christianity?

The article later says this:

In fact, the one major disciplinary about-face expected is this coming document on the Latin Mass, a concession to the ultra-conservatives, who have been living and praying on the fringe of the Church since the reforms of the Second Vatican Council brought in mass in the vernacular. Said one Rome-based priest: "Opening up the Latin rite to anyone would amount to the Church turning back the reforms of Vatican II." A Vatican official who has worked closely with the Pope said that loosening rules on the Latin rite has been a long-time personal goal of Ratzinger, who had led what turned out to be failed negotiations in the early 1980s to bring back into the fold the followers of the breakaway French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre, who have defied the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.
The Vatican official says that Benedict believes that the Council's legacy "has been abused," and finding a way to widen access to the Latin rite "has always remained in his heart." Still, even mainstream members of the Roman hierarchy are opposed, fearing that it will exacerbate divisions within the Church. French bishops have openly argued against it. The Pope's old office, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith last spring, privately advised against the motu proprio, the Vatican official said. Still, Benedict does not appear swayed. The professor Pope may be happy to have a conversation on doctrine, but he knows he always has the last word.


That last sentence may as well have read: Curses! Blast the fact that Christ said the Church would be built on Peter (the Rock)! The pope always has the last say! Why won't he just abuse his authority and do something that would dissolve his own office and deny his own authority?

The whole article conflates dogma and doctrine with Church disciplines.

In his Pocket Catholic Dictionary, Fr. John Hardon, S.J. helps explain the meaning of dogma and doctrine here:

Doctrine - Any truth taught by the Church as necessary for acceptance by the faithful. The truth may be either formally revealed (as the Real Presence), or a theological conclusion (as the canonization of a saint), or part of the natural law (as the sinfulness of contraception). In any case, what makes it doctrine is that the Church authority teaches that it is to be believed. This teaching may be done either solemnly in ex cathedra pronouncements or ordinarily in the perennial exercise of the Church's magisterium or teaching authority. Dogmas are those doctrines which the Church proposes for belief as formally revealed by God. (Etym. Latin doctrina, teaching.)
Here is a detailed explanation of church discipline: Ecclesiastical Discipline

One good thing about the article is that it shows (once again) that the motu proprio is coming soon.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, April 15, 2007 at 05:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)
This Video Will Make "Progressives" Nervous

La métamorphose d'un autel
Uploaded by CHRIST-REDEMPTEUR
This French video titled 'The Metamorphosis of the Altar' shows how FSSP priests and acolytes can transform a table altar into an altar for the Tridentine Latin Mass in just a few minutes. After the motu proprio, this can be done in your own parish, as well.

Any thoughts?


Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, April 15, 2007 at 01:23 AM | Permalink | Comments (73) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, April 14, 2007
The Chaplet of the Divine Mercy

The video above is also available here: The Chaplet of the Divine Mercy - Part 1 of 2


The video above is also available here: The Chaplet of the Divine Mercy - Part 2 of 2

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, April 14, 2007 at 11:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
EWTN - Sister Faustina - The Promise of Mercy

The video above is also available here: EWTN - Sister Faustina - The Promise of Mercy - Part: 1 of 3

The video above is also available here: EWTN - Sister Faustina - The Promise of Mercy - Part: 2 of 3

The video above is also available here: EWTN - Sister Faustina - The Promise of Mercy - Part: 3 of 3

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, April 14, 2007 at 11:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, April 13, 2007
Divine Mercy Sunday: The Feast Of Mercy






This Sunday is Divine Mercy Sunday. It is an important feast, because on that day, Our Lord has promised that those who have gone to Confession and received Holy Communion will receive not only forgiveness of their sins, but the total remission of all temporal punishment due to their sins.




In order to fully understand the tremendous blessings offered by Our Lord through the grace of Divine Mercy Sunday, it may be helpful to review the definitions of important concepts like mortal sin, venial sin, temporal punishment, Purgatory, and indulgence, so they are linked here: Sin; Mortal Sin; Temporal Punishment; Purgatory; Indulgence; How to Get An Indulgence




You can also find information about these concepts (and many more) by using Fr. John Hardon's Pocket Catholic Dictionary. It is available online here: Pocket Catholic Dictionary




Incidentally, Fr. John Hardon, S.J. has just had his cause introduced for canonization. Matt Abbott has a column about that here: Canonization cause commences for beloved Jesuit




Many of his works are available online here: Fr. John A Hardon, S.J. Archives




Back on topic:




The information about Divine Mercy Sunday that follows comes from Wikipedia and the Divine Mercy Sunday website:




The Feast of the Divine Mercy or Divine Mercy Sunday falls on the Octave of Easter (the Sunday immediately following Easter). It is dedicated to the devotion to the Divine Mercy promoted by St. Faustina (Faustyna Kowalska), and is based upon an entry in St. Faustina's diary stating that anyone who participates in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and receives the sacraments of Confession and the Holy Eucharist on this day is assured by Our Lord of full remission of sins, including the remission of all temporal punishment due to our sins.




According to the notebooks of Sister Faustina, Jesus made the following statements about this day:

"On that day the very depths of My tender mercy are open. I pour out a whole ocean of graces upon those souls who approach the fount of My mercy. The soul that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion shall obtain complete forgiveness of sins and punishment. On that day all the divine floodgates through which grace flow are opened. Let no soul fear to draw near to Me, even though its sins be as scarlet. My mercy is so great that no mind, be it of man or of angel, will be able to fathom it throughout all eternity." (Diary of Sr. Faustina, 699)

Our Lord's promise to grant complete forgiveness of sins and punishment on the Feast of Mercy is recorded three times in the Diary of Saint Faustina, each time in a slightly different way:

"I want to grant a complete pardon to the souls that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion on the Feast of My mercy" (1109).




"Whoever approaches the Fountain of Life on this day will be granted complete forgiveness of sins and punishment" (300).




"The soul that will go to Confession and receive Holy Communion will obtain complete forgiveness of sins and punishment" (699).

The devotion was celebrated unofficially in many places for some years. On April 30, 2000 (Divine Mercy Sunday of that year), Pope John Paul II canonized St. Faustina and designated the Sunday after Easter as Divine Mercy Sunday in the General Roman Calendar, with effect from the following year. He also decreed a plenary indulgence associated with this devotion.


Pope John Paul II said he felt a closeness to Sr. Faustina when he was writing Dives in misericordia.




Pope John Paul II died during the vigil of the Divine Mercy Sunday in 2005.




How To Prepare Yourself Properly




Going to Confession is not the only way we should prepare ourselves for Divine Mercy Sunday. As Cardinal Francis Macharski, Archbishop of Krakow, Poland explains in a 1985 pastoral letter, we are not simply called to ask for God's mercy with trust. We are also called to be merciful:



"Our own merciful attitude is likewise a preparation. Without deeds of mercy our devotion would not be real. For Christ does not only reveal the mercy of God, but at the same time He places before people the demand that they conduct themselves in life with love and mercy. The Holy Father states that this requirement constitutes the very heart of the Gospel ethos (Rich in Mercy, 3) ‑ it is the commandment of love and the promise: "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy' (Mt 5:7). Let it be a mercy that is forgiving and true, and universal, with good words, deeds, and prayer for others!"

Our Lord's words to Saint Faustina about this requirement to be merciful are very strong and leave no room for misinterpretation:



"Yes, the first Sunday after Easter is the Feast of Mercy, but there must also be acts of mercy ... I demand from you deeds of mercy, which are to arise out of love for Me. You are to show mercy to your neighbors always and everywhere. You must not shrink from this or try to excuse or absolve yourself from it" (742).

Thus, to fittingly observe the Feast of Mercy, we should:

1. Celebrate the Feast on the Sunday after Easter;

2. Sincerely repent of all our sins;

3. Place our complete trust in Jesus;

4. Go to Confession, preferably before that Sunday;

5. Receive Holy Communion on the day of the Feast;

6. Venerate the Image of The Divine Mercy;

7. Be merciful to others, through our actions, words, and prayers on their behalf.



(Note: To venerate a sacred image or statue simply means to perform some act or make some gesture of deep religious respect toward it because of the person whom it represents ‑ in this case, our Most Merciful Savior.)




Be sure to take advantage of God's Mercy on Divine Mercy Sunday!


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, April 13, 2007 at 07:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, April 12, 2007
Pope Benedict XVI: Evolution Cannot Be Proven
Pope Benedict XVI, "in his first extended reflections on evolution published as pope, says that Darwin's theory cannot be finally proven and that science has unnecessarily narrowed humanity's view of creation."

Here's the story: Pope says evolution can't be proven

Here's a quote:

In a new book, "Creation and Evolution," published Wednesday in German, the pope praised progress gained by science, but cautioned that evolution raises philosophical questions science alone cannot answer.
"The question is not to either make a decision for a creationism that fundamentally excludes science, or for an evolutionary theory that covers over its own gaps and does not want to see the questions that reach beyond the methodological possibilities of natural science," the pope said.

He stopped short of endorsing intelligent design, but said scientific and philosophical reason must work together in a way that does not exclude faith.

"I find it important to underline that the theory of evolution implies questions that must be assigned to philosophy and which themselves lead beyond the realms of science," the pope was quoted as saying in the book, which records a meeting with fellow theologians the pope has known for years.


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, April 12, 2007 at 12:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (29) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, April 11, 2007
Most American Doctors Believe God Intervenes To Heal Patients

Christ Healing by the Well of Bethesda by Carl Bloch (1834-1890)

The Chicago Sun-Times reports that the "majority of American doctors believe God or another supernatural being intervenes in patients' health".

Here's the story: U. OF C. HEALTH STUDY | Physicians believe God can help patients get healthy

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, April 11, 2007 at 10:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, April 08, 2007
Easter, 2007


The Resurrection by Carl Heinrich Bloch (Painted between 1865 and 1879)



Noli me tangere by Correggio (c. 1525)



The Incredulity of Saint Thomas by Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (1601-02)



Supper at Emmaus by Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (1606)

The Holy Gospel According to St. John: Chapter 20

Now on the first day of the week Mary Mag'dalene came to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb. So she ran, and went to Simon Peter and the other disciple, the one whom Jesus loved, and said to them, "They have taken the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid him." Peter then came out with the other disciple, and they went toward the tomb. They both ran, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first; and stooping to look in, he saw the linen cloths lying there, but he did not go in. Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; he saw the linen cloths lying, and the napkin, which had been on his head, not lying with the linen cloths but rolled up in a place by itself. Then the other disciple, who reached the tomb first, also went in, and he saw and believed; for as yet they did not know the scripture, that he must rise from the dead. Then the disciples went back to their homes. But Mary stood weeping outside the tomb, and as she wept she stooped to look into the tomb; and she saw two angels in white, sitting where the body of Jesus had lain, one at the head and one at the feet. They said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping?" She said to them, "Because they have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid him." Saying this, she turned round and saw Jesus standing, but she did not know that it was Jesus. Jesus said to her, "Woman, why are you weeping? Whom do you seek?" Supposing him to be the gardener, she said to him, "Sir, if you have carried him away, tell me where you have laid him, and I will take him away." Jesus said to her, "Mary." She turned and said to him in Hebrew, "Rab-bo'ni!" (which means Teacher). Jesus said to her, "Do not hold me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." Mary Mag'dalene went and said to the disciples, "I have seen the Lord"; and she told them that he had said these things to her. On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the doors being shut where the disciples were, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, "Peace be with you." When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord. Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you." And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained." Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe." Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, "Peace be with you." Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing." Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe." Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name.

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, April 08, 2007 at 12:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, April 06, 2007
Good Friday, 2007




Psalm 22

1: My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Why art thou so far from helping me, from the words of my groaning?
2: O my God, I cry by day, but thou dost not answer; and by night, but find no rest.
3: Yet thou art holy, enthroned on the praises of Israel.
4: In thee our fathers trusted; they trusted, and thou didst deliver them.
5: To thee they cried, and were saved; in thee they trusted, and were not disappointed.
6: But I am a worm, and no man; scorned by men, and despised by the people.
7: All who see me mock at me, they make mouths at me, they wag their heads;
8: "He committed his cause to the LORD; let him deliver him, let him rescue him, for he delights in him!"
9: Yet thou art he who took me from the womb; thou didst keep me safe upon my mother's breasts.
10: Upon thee was I cast from my birth, and since my mother bore me thou hast been my God.
11: Be not far from me, for trouble is near and there is none to help.
12: Many bulls encompass me, strong bulls of Bashan surround me;
13: they open wide their mouths at me, like a ravening and roaring lion.
14: I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint; my heart is like wax, it is melted within my breast;
15: my strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue cleaves to my jaws; thou dost lay me in the dust of death.
16: Yea, dogs are round about me; a company of evildoers encircle me; they have pierced my hands and feet --
17: I can count all my bones -- they stare and gloat over me;
18: they divide my garments among them, and for my raiment they cast lots.
19: But thou, O LORD, be not far off! O thou my help, hasten to my aid!
20: Deliver my soul from the sword, my life from the power of the dog!
21: Save me from the mouth of the lion, my afflicted soul from the horns of the wild oxen!
22: I will tell of thy name to my brethren; in the midst of the congregation I will praise thee:
23: You who fear the LORD, praise him! all you sons of Jacob, glorify him, and stand in awe of him, all you sons of Israel!
24: For he has not despised or abhorred the affliction of the afflicted; and he has not hid his face from him, but has heard, when he cried to him.
25: From thee comes my praise in the great congregation; my vows I will pay before those who fear him.
26: The afflicted shall eat and be satisfied; those who seek him shall praise the LORD! May your hearts live for ever!
27: All the ends of the earth shall remember and turn to the LORD; and all the families of the nations shall worship before him.
28: For dominion belongs to the LORD, and he rules over the nations.
29: Yea, to him shall all the proud of the earth bow down; before him shall bow all who go down to the dust, and he who cannot keep himself alive.
30: Posterity shall serve him; men shall tell of the Lord to the coming generation,
31: and proclaim his deliverance to a people yet unborn, that he has wrought it.

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, April 06, 2007 at 02:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, April 05, 2007
Giuliani To Social Conservatives: Take It Or Leave It


Rudy has told social conservatives to take it or leave it.

I choose leave it.

Here's the story: Giuliani to social conservatives: Take it or leave it

Here's a quote:

Rudy Giuliani's message to social conservatives: If you don't like my views, don't vote for me.
The Republican presidential frontrunner Thursday reaffirmed his support for federal funding for some abortions, a position which puts him at odds with many conservatives. During a press conference at the State Capitol in Columbia, South Carolina, he said he didn't expect to win over 100 percent of the voters.

"If that's real important to you, if that's the most important thing, I'm comfortable with the fact that you won't vote for me," the former mayor said.

Although Giuliani said he is does not like abortion, he said he would not change the standing law. Specifically, he said would not change the Hyde amendment, which restricts federal funding for abortion to cases of rape, incest and to save the life of the mother.

"I'm against abortion, I hate it, I wish there never was an abortion and I would counsel a woman to have an adoption instead of an abortion," the former New York mayor said. "But ultimately I believe it is an individual right and the woman can make that choice."


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, April 05, 2007 at 06:15 PM | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, April 04, 2007
CNS: Traditionalists find reverence, calm at pre-Vatican II Mass in Rome


Catholic News Service, the media organ of the USNCCB, has a new article about traditionalist Catholics.

Here's the story: Traditionalists find reverence, calm at pre-Vatican II Mass in Rome

The article seems to examine traditionalist Catholics as though they were curious looking insects, and the author seems to go out of his way to make sure readers understand that only a small number of Catholics attend the Tridentine Mass, because he contrasts the number of Tridentine Mass attendees to the number of Catholics who attend Mass celebrated with the Missal of Paul VI more than once.

It seems the impending (I've heard dates ranging from Holy Thursday, which is tomorrow, to "May") motu proprio has already piqued people's interest in the Traditional Latin Mass.

My concern is that progressive Catholics will work to discourage interest and attendance at the Tridentine Mass, even with the motu proprio, by continuing to marginalize traditional Catholics and pointing out how small they are in number and how attached they are to things progressives consider antiquated and archaic.

What are your impressions of the article?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, April 04, 2007 at 10:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)
Matt Abbott: Saving Those Damned Catholics
Saving Those Damned Catholics is described thusly by the American life League's Pro-Life Store: With wit, insight and fearless presentation of facts, Judie Brown examines the dissidents who have betrayed the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion, contraception, euthanasia and human embryonic stem cell research.

Matt Abbott has a new article about the book. Check out the article here: 'Saving those damned Catholics'

After you check it out, share your thoughts.

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, April 04, 2007 at 09:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (28) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, April 03, 2007
Liturgy Is The Issue In The Ave Maria Dispute
Jeffrey Tucker at The New Liturgical Movement has written a blog piece about the recent controversy at Ave Maria University that resulted in the forced termination and subsequent rehiring of Fr. Joseph Fessio, SJ where he will stay on in some consulting capacity. Here's the post: Liturgy Is The Issue In The Ave Maria Dispute

The blog post cites an interview with Roger McCaffrey, an associate of Fr. Fessio's who worked for Ave Maria. Here is that interview: Chaos erupts at Ave Maria University after Fr. Fessio firing – McCaffrey: Traditionalist Catholics need not apply

Tucker explains: "What we have here is a conflict between charismatic elements in the administration and B16-style "traditionalism" among the donors and faculty."

He then goes on to say:

I must say that I've never understood the "conservative" brand of charismatic Catholicism that you find here and there in the Catholic world, but it its influence seems strong if perhaps waning. I'm not even sure I know how to account for it, except to say that the liturgical confusion has been so severe over the last decades that many people have become very confused, and that this confusion is not limited to the "progressive" camp. This is why people who work in their parishes for good liturgy are not always correct in anticipating support from parish pro-lifers and traditionally-minded CCD teachers. It may seem strange that a group of people who are absolutely attached to Catholic morals and doctrine could be so egregiously off track when it comes to liturgy (and music!) but there it is.
One can only hope that as the New Liturgical Movement makes advances, these good people will come around to understand the relationship between doctrine, morals, and liturgy, and that the Catholic faith is not best transmitted in liturgies dominated by the pop songs of Dana and the like.


To that I say: Amen!

I have never found Charismatic masses or "praise" music appealing, and I have never really understood why anyone does.

I have known many good people who are attached to the Catholic charismatic movement, especially after their attendance at Franciscan University of Steubenville, but I have never been comfortable listening to praise music or with the things I have observed in Catholic charismatic liturgies.

I've never been fond of Life Teen either, and not just because of the music. In my opinion, their liturgies attempt to make the Mass relevant to teens, but they do so in ways that seem to place too much emphasis on emotion and often involve liturgical experimentation and even abuses (such as teens surrounding the altar behind the priest during the Eucharistic prayer). The scandal involving Life teen Founder, Fr. Dale Fushek did not help matters: For 20 Years Dale Fushek Was the Golden Boy of the Phoenix Catholic Diocese. Now, His Golden Boys Are Talking

Let's all pray that the impending motu proprio and the "reform of the reform" will improve Catholic liturgy soon.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, April 03, 2007 at 12:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (43) | TrackBack (0)
'The Exorcist': The True Story Behind The Movie


When Jesus had thus spoken, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, "Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me." The disciples looked at one another, uncertain of whom he spoke. One of his disciples, whom Jesus loved, was lying close to the breast of Jesus; so Simon Peter beckoned to him and said, "Tell us who it is of whom he speaks." So lying thus, close to the breast of Jesus, he said to him, "Lord, who is it?" Jesus answered, "It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it." So when he had dipped the morsel, he gave it to Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot. Then after the morsel, Satan entered into him. Jesus said to him, "What you are going to do, do quickly." Now no one at the table knew why he said this to him. Some thought that, because Judas had the money box, Jesus was telling him, "Buy what we need for the feast"; or, that he should give something to the poor. So, after receiving the morsel, he immediately went out; and it was night. (John 13:21-30)
Easter is approaching. The Resurrection of Jesus is the crowning proof of His Divinity and a living witness to the triumph of Christ over darkness.

In the days preceding the passion and death of Our Lord, the devil was working to bring about the destruction of Jesus. It is useful to reflect upon the darkness defeated by Our Lord, and to remember that we can share in his victory, if we cling to him and flee from evil as we would from an infectious disease.

Are you familiar with the true story behind the movie, The Exorcist? If not, the here it is: 'The Exorcist': The Story Behind the Movie

Here is another true exorcism story: Begone Satan!

Here is the article referenced at the beginning of the article linked above: Demonic Possession and Exorcism

Here is an updated variant of the same article: Demonic Possession Involves Body, Not Soul

General information about diabolical possession can be found here: Demonical Possession and here: What are Possession and Obsession by the Devil?.

This book, by Fr. Malachi Martin is a very good read: Hostage to the Devil: The Possession and Exorcism of Five Contemporary Americans

Evidence of Satan in the Modern World by Leon Cristiani is another good book on the subject of the diabolical. Chapters 4-8 are available online here: Evidence of Satan in the Modern World.

This book which covers all things pertaining to spiritual theology (and not just diabolical obsession and possession) is excellent and I highly recommend it: Spiritual Theology by Fr. Jordan Aumann, OP

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, April 03, 2007 at 09:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, April 01, 2007
The Gay Agenda: Pushing Homosexuality On The Front Page Of The New York Times Web Page On Palm Sunday
The New York Times prominently featured an article about a seventh grade boy "coming out" to his family (and his entire school) on their web page on this Palm Sunday. The article was the most prominent article on the page. It was featured "above the fold" with the picture on the top.

Here's the story (free web subscription may be required) Parenting: Accepting Gay Identity, and Gaining Strength

Here are some quotes:

One month before Zach O’Connor, a seventh grader at Brown Middle School here, came out about being gay, he was in such turmoil that he stood up in homeroom and, in a voice everyone could hear, asked a girl out on a date. It was Valentine’s Day 2003, and Zach was 13.
“I was doing this to survive,” he says. “This is what other guys were doing, getting girlfriends. I should get one, too.”


...

Cindy and Dan O’Connor were very worried about Zach. Though bright, he was doing poorly at school. At home, he would pick fights, slam doors, explode for no reason. They wondered how their two children could be so different; Matt, a year and a half younger, was easygoing and happy. Zach was miserable.
The O’Connors had hunches. Mr. O’Connor is a director of business development for American Express, Ms. O’Connor a senior vice president of a bank, and they have had gay colleagues, gay bosses, classmates who came out after college. From the time Zach was little, they knew he was not a run-of-the-mill boy. His friends were girls or timid boys.

“Zach had no interest in throwing a football,” Mr. O’Connor says. But their real worry was his anger, his unhappiness, his low self-esteem. “He’d say: ‘I’m not smart. I’m not like other kids,’ ” says Ms. O’Connor. The middle-school psychologist started seeing him daily.

The misery Zach caused was minor compared with the misery he felt. He says he knew he was different by kindergarten, but he had no name for it, so he would stay to himself. He tried sports, but, he says, “It didn’t work out well.” He couldn’t remember the rules. In fifth grade, when boys at recess were talking about girls they had crushes on, Zach did not have someone to name.

By sixth grade, he knew what “gay” meant, but didn’t associate it with himself. That year, he says: “I had a crush on one particular eighth-grade boy, a very straight jock. I knew whatever I was feeling I shouldn’t talk about it.” He considered himself a broken version of a human being. “I did think about suicide,” he says.

Then, for reasons he can’t wholly explain beyond pure desperation, a month after his Valentine “date” — “We never actually went out, just walked around school together” — in the midst of math class, he told a female friend. By day’s end it was all over school. The psychologist called him in. “I burst into tears,” he recalls. “I said, ‘Yes, it’s true.’ Every piece of depression came pouring out. It was such a mess.”

That night, when his mother got home from work, she stuck her head in his room to say hi. “I said, ‘Ma, I need to talk to you about something, I’m gay.’ She said, ‘O.K., anything else?’ ‘No, but I just told you I’m gay.’ ‘O.K., that’s fine, we still love you.’ I said, ‘That’s it?’ I was preparing for this really dramatic moment.”

Ms. O’Connor recalls, “He said, ‘Mom, aren’t you going to freak out?’ I said: ‘It’s up to you to decide who to love. I have your father, and you have to figure out what’s best for you.’ He said, ‘Don’t tell Dad.’ ”

“Of course I told him,” Ms. O’Connor says.

“With all our faults,” Mr. O’Connor says, “we’re in this together.”

Having a son come out so young was a lot of work for the parents. They found him a therapist who is gay 20 miles away in New Haven. The therapist helped them find a gay youth group, OutSpoken, a 50-minute drive away in Norwalk.

Dan Woog, a writer and longtime soccer coach at Staples High in Westport, helped found OutSpoken in 1993. He says for the first 10 years, the typical member was 17 to 22 years old. “They’d come in saying: ‘I’m gay. My life is over,’ ” Mr. Woog says. “One literally hyperventilated walking through the door.”

But in recent years, he says, the kids are 14 to 17 and more confident. “They say: ‘Hi, I’m gay. How do I meet people?’ ”


...

For the first 10 years, Mr. Woog never saw a parent; meetings were from 4 to 6 p.m. Sunday, so members could get out of the house without arousing suspicion. Now, he says, parents often bring the child to the first meeting.
Still, seventh grade was not easy. “We heard kids across the street yelling ‘homo’ as he waited for the school bus,” Mr. O’Connor says. Zach says classmates tossed pencils at him and constantly mocked him. “One kid followed me class to class calling me ‘faggot,’ ” he says. “After a month I turned and punched him in the face. He got quiet and walked away. I said, ‘You got beat up by a faggot.’ ”


...

His father took him to a gay-lesbian conference at Central Connecticut State in New Britain, and Zach was thrilled to see so many gay people in one place. His therapist took him to a Gay Bingo Night at St. Paul’s Church on the Green in Norwalk that raises money for AIDS care. Zach became a regular and within a few months was named Miss Congeniality.
“They crowned me with a tiara and sash, and I walked around the room waving,” he recalls. “I was still this shy 14-year-old in braces. I hadn’t reached my socialness yet, and everyone was cheering.

“I was the future. Most of the men were middle-aged or older, and to see this 14-year-old out, they loved it. They were so happy.”

Now, as a 17-year-old 11th grader, Zach has passed through phases that many gay men of previous generations didn’t get to until their 20s, 30s, even 40s. “Eighth grade was kind of his militant time,” Mr. O’Connor says.

“Everything was a rainbow,” says Ms. O’Connor.

These days, Zach is so busy, he rarely has time for the gay-straight club. He’s in several singing and drama groups and is taking an SAT prep course.

“I’ve been out so long, I don’t really need the club as a resource,” he says. “I’m not going to say I’m popular, but I’m friendly with nearly everybody. Sophomore year, my social life skyrocketed.”

In music groups he made male friends for the first time. “They weren’t afraid of me,” he says. “They like me.”

His brother, Matt, says sometimes kids come up to him and ask what it’s like to have a gay brother. “I say it’s normal to me, I don’t think of it anymore.”

As for his parents, they’re happy that Zach’s happy.

“Coming out was the best thing for him,” Ms. O’Connor says. “We ask him, ‘Why didn’t you come out in fifth grade?’ ”


The article featured an mp3 you can listen to here: Zach O'Connor on Coming Out Gay

Not only does this article prove (to me) that the New York Times is cramming an agenda down people's throats, it also indicates (to me) that they aren't as serious as they pretend to be in their opposition to the Iraq war and the policies of the Bush Administration, because if they really cared about that stuff, they wouldn't do puff pieces like this promoting the "normalcy" and need for absolute societal acceptance of anal and/or oral sex between two or more men while the nation is supposedly crumbling because of George W. Bush.

What are people thinking doing this big story about this young kid telling his parents he's "gay"? Why is his sexual confusion at an age too young to declare anything definite about himself headline news? What if he changes his mind about himself later? It seems to me he's locked himself in now, with the help of his parents.

What type of parent runs out and finds a therapist who is "gay" right away when their seventh grader announces he's "gay"? Don't people realize that "gay" therapist is invested in spreading the idea that homosexual tendencies and activity are good?

Homosexuals and those who sympathize with homosexuality will likely accuse me of "homophobia".

My response is that I am not afraid of people with homosexual tendencies, and I certainly don't hate them. Actually, I'm more worried for them than those who have decided that enabling them is the best policy.

The Church teaches that homosexuality is an intrinsically disordered orientation towards a serious and intrinsic moral evil. It is a tendency, more or less strong, depending on the individual, to be physically attracted in a sexual way to persons of the same gender. It is a tendency towards a moral evil, not a gift. It is a temptation, a conflict between desire and duty. One never hears of other intrinsically disordered orientations such as alcoholism, anorexia nervosa, bulimia, or kleptomania, celebrated as gifts; they are rightly understood as harmful disorders. Pro-anorexia websites supporting the right to live an anorexic lifestyle are correctly viewed as profoundly dangerous, even in secular society. However, homosexual activism has made such tremendous strides within the culture that any criticism of the homosexual lifestyle is vilified as hate speech. What a difference! Sadly, this politically correct mindset, under the mantle of buzzwords such as tolerance and diversity, has crept into Catholic circles, with the collusion of homosexually-oriented priests and religious (male and female) and has paved the way for preparing rank and file Catholics to tolerate the homosexual lifestyle as a sign of God’s diverse creation, and ultimately, a gift. A correct understanding of Catholic teaching shows that, as with any other aberrant drive or appetite, homosexuality can only be called a gift in the sense that it is a cross to bear. In living as the Church teaches, utilizing prayer and the sacraments, homosexually-oriented persons can overcome their homosexual temptations and merit abundant graces.

As a lifestyle, homosexuality is statistically unhealthy. As Catholic Answers’ special report on “Gay Marriage” relates:

In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of diagnostic disorders. In retrospect, this decision appears to have been inspired by political pressure rather than medical evidence.
Homosexuals of both sexes remain fourteen times more likely to attempt suicide than heterosexuals and 3.5 times more likely to commit suicide successfully. Thirty years ago, this propensity toward suicide was attributed to social rejection, but the numbers have remained largely stable since then despite far greater public acceptance than existed in 1973. Study after study shows that male and female homosexuals have much higher rates of interpersonal maladjustment, depression, conduct disorder, childhood abuse (both sexual and violent), domestic violence, alcohol or drug abuse, anxiety, and dependency on psychiatric care than heterosexuals. Life expectancy of homosexual men was only forty-eight years before the AIDS virus came on the scene, and it is now down to thirty-eight. Only 2 percent of homosexual men live past age sixty-five.

Male homosexuals are prone to cancer (especially anal cancer, which is almost unheard-of in male heterosexuals) and various sexually transmitted diseases, including urethritis, laryngitis, prostatitis, hepatitis A and B, syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, herpes, and genital warts (which are caused by the human papilloma virus, which also causes genital cancers). Lesbians are at lower risk for STDs but at high risk for breast cancer. Homosexuals of both sexes have high rates of drug abuse, including cocaine, marijuana, LSD and other psychedelics, barbiturates, and amyl nitrate.

Male homosexuals are particularly prone to develop sexually transmitted diseases, in part because of the high degree of promiscuity displayed by male homosexuals. One study in San Francisco showed that 43 percent of male homosexuals had had more than 500 sexual partners. Seventy-nine percent of their sexual partners were strangers. Only 3 percent had had fewer than ten sexual partners. The nature of sodomy contributes to the problem among male homosexuals. The rectum is not designed for sex. It is very fragile. Indeed, its fragility and tendency to tear and bleed is one factor making anal sex such an efficient means of transmitting the AIDS and hepatitis viruses.

Lesbians, in contrast, are less promiscuous than male homosexuals but more promiscuous than heterosexual women: One large study found that 42 percent of lesbians had more than ten sexual partners. A substantial percentage of them were strangers. Lesbians share male homosexuals’ propensity for drug abuse, psychiatric disorder, and suicide.


In the face of such evidence, it becomes clear that any pronouncements of tolerance for the homosexual lifestyle or the "gifts" that flow from a homosexual orientation run contrary, not only to Church teaching, but also authentic charity. Homosexuality hurts people. It’s a serious disorder, not a gift. Telling people otherwise isn’t Christian and loving. It’s ignorant, cowardly, and irresponsible. Imagine embracing an alcoholic, drug addict, anorexic, or bulimic and telling them that you accept, respect, and support their lifestyle choice! Imagine telling someone diagnosed with the beginning stages of cancer that you support their decision to continue smoking and continuing their other unhealthy lifestyle choices. Yet this is what progressives ask of Christians in regard to the homosexual lifestyle, ignoring evidence that homosexuality is bodily harmful, and becoming outraged at Christian concern for the immortal souls of persons who actively engage in this spiritually deadly "lifestyle".

If you will not believe me, here is what homosexuals admit about themselves: 'The Gay Report'

I encourage you to read this article: The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement. A homosexual man wrote it and he is very honest about what homosexuality actually involves. It isn't graphic or disgusting in its detail. It is an honest, heartfelt life story and it is extremely eye-opening.

Authentic Catholic teaching on these matters is not discrimination against persons with homosexual tendencies. All deliberate sexual acts (whether they are actions done alone or with others) outside of the context of marriage, or which are deliberately closed to the creation of new life (within marriage) are objectively serious matter and to engage in such acts with sufficient reflection and full consent is a mortal sin.

Any sexual act that does not comply with Church teaching is not an act of love. It is an act of masturbation, whether alone, or through the use of another person's body.

This teaching is a struggle for everyone, not just homosexuals, because of our fallen nature and the war of our passions against right reason. We can all pray for deliverance from such temptations, but nobody can reasonably expect that they will forever remain free from any temptation in this area, regardless of the specific nature of the temptation. We are simply called to pray and struggle. Through our struggle we are constantly reminded of our frailty and therefore our total dependence upon God. Such temptations, understood properly, are a means of keeping us close to God, even though they are a cross.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, April 01, 2007 at 03:55 PM | Permalink | Comments (88) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, March 31, 2007
From Rorate Caeli: Cardinal Bertone Confirms Motu Proprio; USCCB Expects It Soon


Rorate Caeli reports that in an interview for the cover story (pages 56-60) of Le Figaro Magazine (weekly magazine of the French national daily Le Figaro), published today (not yet available on the newspaper's website), Cardinal Bertone has confirmed that the impending motu proprio allowing for the wider use of the Missal published in 1962 by Pope John XXIII, with its own calendar will be published.

Here's the story: Breaking news: Bertone confirms motu proprio

Here's the quote:

Is a Decree widening the possibility of celebrating the Latin Mass according to the rite from before Vatican II (the so-called Mass of Saint Pius V) still expected?
[Secretary of State] Cardinal Bertone: The merit of the conciliar liturgical reform is intact. But both [for reasons of] not losing the great liturgical heritage left by Saint Pius V and for granting the wish of those faithful who desire to attend Masses according to this rite, within the framework of the Missal published in 1962 by Pope John XXIII, with its own calendar, there is no valid reason not to grant to every priest in the world* the right to celebrate according to this form. The authorization of the Supreme Pontiff would evidently preserve the validity of the rite of Paul VI. The publication of the motu proprio which specifies this authorisation will take place, but it will be the pope himself who will explain his motivations and the framework of his decision. The Sovereign Pontiff will personally explain his vision for the use of the ancient Missal to the Christian people, and particularly to the Bishops.


The USCCB has also confirmed that the motu proprio is expected soon: Tridentine Mass: Pope looks for bridge to tradition

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, March 31, 2007 at 10:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, March 25, 2007
Another Effort To Legalize A New Kind of Murder: The California "Compassionate Choices" Act


A larger version of he image above may be viewed here: The Grim Reaper & The "Compassionate Choices" Act: Assisted Suicide In California

An Assembly committee will hear this bill on Tuesday....

I cribbed the information below from this website: California Catholic Conference E-Newsletter, February 26, 2007

On Thursday, February 15, 2007, Assemblymembers Patty Berg and Lloyd Levine introduced AB 374, a bill to legalize assisted suicide in California. The bill is virtually identical to AB 654/AB 651, the legislation that failed in the 2005-2006 session. AB 374, with the title of The Compassionate Choices Act, would make it legal for a physician to prescribe lethal drugs to a person, diagnosed with a terminal disease, who had six months or less to live.
However, this time they recruited the Speaker of the Assembly, Fabian Nuñez as a co-author (along with Assembly Members Feuer, Bass, Beall, Brownley, De Leon, De Saulnier, Dymally, Eng, Evans, Huffman, Jones, Karnette, Laird, Leno, Ma, Saldaña, Wolk and Senators Calderon, Kuehl, Lowenthal, Oropeza, Romero, Steinberg, and Wiggins).

Assemblymembers Bass, Dymally, Laird, Leno, Wolk and Senators Kuehl, Lowenthal and Romero were also co-authors of AB 651.

At their press conference, the authors and the Speaker excitedly declared that "this time it would pass" and insisted that what they wanted to legalize wasn't "suicide" but "aid in dying" and "compassionate choice."

Although the Speaker's influence may have some effect on the votes in the Assembly, Californians Against Assisted Suicide (CAAS), an eclectic coalition that includes physicians, nurses, hospice workers, advocates for low-income workers, a Latino civil rights organization, disability rights groups, as well as Catholic institutions (including the California Catholic Conference) and pro-life advocates, is committed to stopping the passage of AB 374.

As Catholics we oppose euthanasia or assisted suicide because we believe that human life is a gift from God, that we are stewards—not owners—of that life, that we are made in God's image and that human life is sacred from conception to natural death. This, of course, informs and underlies our policy perspectives.

The members of the coalition bring many different religious and philosophical beliefs with them-but we all join in opposing the legalization of assisted suicide. Following are the arguments which have been effective in our advocacy with California legislators in the past—and we pray will prevail again. We urge you to use these when contacting your Assemblymember or Senator.

California law already gives every patient the right to refuse extraordinary end-of-life treatment. AB 374 isn't about improving care for the terminally or chronically ill; it is about legalizing assisted suicide. The authors—wishing to soften their language—call it "compassionate choice," or "aid in dying, or "death with dignity."

AB 374 is strongly opposed by both the American Medical Association and the California Medical Association, as well as hospice workers whose job it is to provide compassionate care. Legalizing assisted suicide could seriously damage the relationship between patients and healthcare workers.

It is especially remarkable that the Legislature is considering AB 374—legalizing assisted suicide—at a time when millions of low-income Californians and their families don't have access even to basic health care.

AB 374 poses real danger to people with new disabilities or chronic diseases. Research overwhelmingly shows that people with new disabilities will often initially experience despondency and even suicidal feelings, but later will adapt well and enjoy life. Working through this despondency often takes longer than the mere two-week waiting period—making it all too easy to succumb to despair.

AB 374 would provide a powerful incentive for health insurance providers, disaffected family members or potential heirs to promote assisted suicide over long-term expensive care.

People often live many years after a "terminal" diagnosis, yet initial depression and temporary thoughts of suicide are common. Physicians who specialize in end-of-life care know that these thoughts are transitory, and that patients respond to support from health care providers (or professionals), family and hospice workers.

Studies confirm that most of those killed under Oregon's assisted suicide law consented to the lethal procedure for reasons of "autonomy" or fear of "loss of dignity" or abandonment rather than for intractable pain.

The coalition's website has contact information for those of you who wish to call, FAX or visit their legislators in order to communicate your views. It also has facts, articles, essays and statistics.

We urge you to be "faithful citizens" and participate in this important issue.


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, March 25, 2007 at 03:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, March 23, 2007
Healthy Catholic #06: Food and Drink

The video above can also be viewed here: Healthy Catholic #06: Food and Drink

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, March 23, 2007 at 10:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, March 22, 2007
Is It A Sin To Rebuke A Priest?
A reader has suggested that it is sinful to speak ill of a priest or a bishop and that rather than speak out against corruption within the clergy, Catholics should pray and remain silent.

I couldn't disagree more.

Although I would caution Catholics against the sin of rash judgment, and remind people to be mindful of the requirements of the Eighth Commandment, I firmly maintain that Catholics have a duty to rebuke the clergy when they have gone astray and to warn others against such clerics so they will not be confused by the errors wayward priests and/or bishops are observed to be spreading.

There are provisions for rebuking clergy described in Sacred Scripture:

“Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning." (1 Timothy 5:19-20)
“If your brother sins, go and show him his fault in private; if he listens to you, you have won your brother. But if he does not listen to you, take one or two more with you, so that by the mouth of two or three witnesses every fact may be confirmed. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector.” (Matthew 18:15-17)


There are also examples:

"And when Kephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face because he clearly was wrong. For, until some people came from James, he used to eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he began to draw back and separated himself, because he was afraid of the circumcised. And the rest of the Jews (also) acted hypocritically along with him, with the result that even Barnabas was carried away by their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not on the right road in line with the truth of the gospel, I said to Kephas in front of all, 'If you, though a Jew, are living like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you compel the Gentiles to live like Jews ?'” (Galatians 2:11-14)
During the Arian heresy, approximately one third of the bishops in the Church became Arian, along with countless priests and entire dioceses. Yet if we are to believe, as apparently some Catholics do, that priests and bishops may never be corrected, never challenged, and/or never exposed, it was wrong to say that Arian priests and bishops were teaching error.

The same would follow for countless other heretical sects that had their origins in heretical Catholic clergy.

Martin Luther was a Catholic priest. Can he not be criticized?

Saints were often critical of priests and religious:

St. Catherine of Siena made a pilgrimage to Avignon in Southern France to persuade the Pontiff Pope Gregory XI to return from exile to Rome where he belonged. After the death of Gregory XI on March 26, 1378, the Great Schism began when Pope Urban VI was selected as his successor. Several of the dissident French cardinals objected and elected their own at Fondi Robert of Geneva who became the antipope Clement VII and set up his headquarters in Avignon. St. Catherine knew Urban was the true Pope and did all in her power to secure support for him and end the schism. While she was a staunch supporter of his Primacy, she did not hesitate to rebuke him when she saw weakness or knew he was wrong.

St. Catherine was also critical of priests in her Dialogue (the work which was the primary reason she was made a Doctor of the Church):

"Your miseries are not hid from you now, for the worm of conscience sleeps no longer, but is gnawing you, the devils shout and render to you the reward which they are accustomed to give their servants, that is to say, confusion and condemnation; they wish to bring you to despair, so that at the moment of death you may not escape from their hands, and therefore they try to confuse you, so that afterwards when you are with them they may render to you of the part which is theirs. Oh, wretch! the dignity in which I placed you, you now see shining as it really is, and you know to your shame that you have held and used in such guilty darkness the substance of the holy Church, that you see yourself to be a thief, a debtor, who ought to pay his debt to the poor and the holy Church. Then your conscience represents to you that you have spent the money on public harlots, and have brought up your children and enriched your relations, and have thrown it away on gluttony and on many silver vessels and other adornments for your house. Whereas you should have lived in voluntary poverty.”
"Your conscience represents to you the divine office which you neglected, by which you fell into the guilt of mortal sin, and how even when you recited it with your mouth your heart was far from Me. Conscience also shows you your subjects, that is to say, the love and hunger which you should have felt towards nourishing them in virtue, giving them the example of your life and striking them with the hand of mercy and the rod of justice, and because you did the contrary your conscience and the horrible likeness of the Devil reproves you.”

"And if as a prelate you have given prelacies or any charge of souls unjustly to one of your subjects, that is, that you have not considered to whom and how you were giving it, the Devil puts this also before your conscience, because you ought to have given it, not on account of pleasant words, nor in order to please creatures, nor for the sake of gifts, but solely with regard to virtue, My honor and the salvation of souls. And since you have not done so you are reproved, and for your greater pain and confusion you have before your conscience and the light of your intellect that which you have done and ought not to have done, and that which you ought to have done and have not done.”


The reforms of St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross were due to the laxity in their religious order. Both were openly critical of such laxity and met with opposition because of their reforms.

The Norbertine Order was started because of the widespread laxity, and even debauchery among priests in St. Norbert’s day. St. Norbert exhorted and even rebuked his fellow priests, and they responded by attempting to assassinate him.

It is ludicrous to think that clerics are beyond correction, as if infallible by virtue of their office. It is disturbing that such a simplistic outlook exists after the egregious wrongdoing (and that is putting things mildly) of so many priests and even bishops was exposed because of the sex abuse scandal that rocked the Church in recent years.

The 1983 Code of Canon Law makes provisions for the laity to address their concerns about priests:

Canon 212:
§1. Conscious of their own responsibility, the Christian faithful are bound to follow with Christian obedience those things which the sacred pastors, inasmuch as they represent Christ, declare as teachers of the faith or establish as rulers of the Church.

§2. The Christian faithful are free to make known to the pastors of the Church their needs, especially spiritual ones, and their desires.

§3. According to the knowledge, competence, and prestige which they possess, they have the right and even at times the duty to manifest to the sacred pastors their opinion on matters which pertain to the good of the Church and to make their opinion known to the rest of the Christian faithful, without prejudice to the integrity of faith and morals, with reverence toward their pastors, and attentive to common advantage and the dignity of persons.


I also include the following for consideration:

"When there is an imminent danger for the Faith, Prelates must be questioned, even publicly, by their subjects." ~ St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II, II, q. 33, a. 4
"It is better that scandals arise than the truth be suppressed." ~ Pope St. Gregory the Great

"When circumstances make it necessary, it is not prelates alone who have to watch over the integrity of the faith." ~ Pope Leo XIII

"The road to hell is paved with the skulls of erring priests, with bishops as their signposts." ~ St. John Chrysostom (347-407), Doctor of the Church, generally considered the most prominent doctor of the Greek Church and the greatest preacher ever heard in a Christian pulpit.

"The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops." ~ St. Athanasius

"The road to hell is paved with the skulls of bishops." ~ Saint John Eudes

"But how, I ask, does it happen that the saints, who live only for God, resist their ordination through a sense of their unworthiness, and that some run blindly to the priesthood, and rest not until they attain it by lawful or unlawful means? Ah. Unhappy men! Says St. Bernard, to be registered among the priests of God shall be for them the same as to be enrolled on the catalogue of the damned. And why? Because such persons are generally called to the priesthood, not by God, but by relatives, by interest, or ambition. Thus they enter the house of God, not through the motive a priest should have, but through worldly motives. Behold why the faithful are abandoned, the Church dishonored, so many souls perish, and with them such priests are also damned." ~ St. Alphonsus de Liguori (1696-1787), Doctor of the Church (Moral Theology), Founder of the Redemptorist congregation


Saints were even critical of homosexual priests and/or religious:

"Any cleric or monk who seduces young men or boys, or who is apprehended in kissing or in any shameful situation, shall be publicly flogged and shall lose his clerical tonsure. Thus shorn, he shall be disgraced by spitting into his face, bound in iron chains, wasted by six months of close confinement, and for three days each week put on barley bread given him toward evening. Following this period, he shall spend a further six months living in a small segregated courtyard in the custody of a spiritual elder, kept busy with manual labor and prayer, subjected to vigils and prayers, forced to walk at all times in the company of two spiritual brothers, never again allowed to associate with young men for purposes of improper conversation or advice." ~ St. Basil the Great (329-379), Bishop of Caesarea, Father of the Church, and one of the most distinguished Doctors of the Church.
"The befouling cancer of sodomy is, in fact, spreading so through the clergy or rather, like a savage beast, is raging with such shameless abandon through the flock of Christ, that for many of them it would be more salutary to be burdened with service in the world than, under the pretext of religion, to be enslaved so easily under the iron rule of satanic tyranny. It would be better for them to perish alone as laymen that, after having changed their attire but not their disposition, to drag others with them to destruction, as Truth itself testifies when It says, “But if anyone is a cause of stumbling to one of these little ones, it would be better for him to be drowned in the depths of the sea with a great millstone round his neck.” Unless immediate effort be exerted by the Apostolic See, there is little that, even if one wished to curb this unbridled evil, he could not check the momentum of its progress."

"Unquestionable, this vice, since it surpasses the enormity of all others, is impossible to compare with any other vice. Without fail it brings death of the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust. It leads to error, totally removes truth from the deluded mind, prepares a trap for the traveller and secures the pit and makes it impossible for the victim to escape. It opens up Hell and closes the gates Paradise, changes a citizen of the Heavenly Jerusalem into an heir of infernal Babylon, and turns a Heavenly star into chaff for eternal fire; it cuts off a member of the Church and hurls him into the depths of the devouring flames of Hell." ~ St. Peter Damian (1007 -1072), Doctor of the Church, Cardinal-Bishop of Ostia


It seems to me that the clericalist attitude that priests and bishops are beyond reproach is actually quite dangerous. The idea has a pietistic veneer, and those who hold it may be sincere, but do they realize that attitudes like that contributed to the mentality that allowed the priestly abuse scandals to stay under the radar for so long?

Do they realize that Catholics have an obligation to lead others to the truth and away from error?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, March 22, 2007 at 10:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (33) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Pornography's Death Grip: An Interview with Bishop Robert Finn


Zenit has an interview with Bishop Flynn on his recent pastoral letter on the scourge of pornography, Blessed Are The Pure In Heart.

The interview is available here: Pornography's Death Grip: Interview With Bishop Robert Finn

An earlier post on the pastoral letter can be viewed here: Bishop Finn's Pastoral Letter On Pornography: Blessed Are the Pure in Heart

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 09:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)
Photos: Mahonyfest 2007
Click on the images to enlarge them:

Special thanks to Allyson Smith for attending the Religious Education Congress and taking the photos!



























Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 08:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (23) | TrackBack (0)
Mahonyfest 2007 In Words & Moving Pictures
Special thanks to Allyson Smith for attending the Religious Education Congress and filming the videos!

















The Mass featured in these images is described here: Bongos, Dancers, and Father-Mother God: Richard Rohr’s Mass at the Los Angeles Religious Education Congress

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, March 21, 2007 at 07:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Fighting The Homosexual Agenda In The United Kingdom

The video above is also available here: What The Government Doesn't Want You To Know

Any thoughts?


Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, March 20, 2007 at 04:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (30) | TrackBack (1)
Cardinal Francis George: Sending Mixed Messages?


Cardinal Francis Eugene George, O.M.I., Cardinal Archbishop of Chicago, was recently quoted as saying:

As far as criticizing priests who give communion to pro-choice politicians, 'maybe you should talk to Pope Benedict XVI, who gives communion to the pro-choice prime minister of Italy. You have to look at a lot of things. It's not all that simple'" (cf. Catholic New World, March 18-31, 2007, "Persistence and Patience urged for Pro-Life Leaders")
Father J. Patrick Serna has written an article in response to Cardinal George's comment, which Matt Abbot has reprinted in his column. You can find it here: Priest concerned over Chicago cardinal's remarks on pro-abortion politicians receiving Communion

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, March 20, 2007 at 09:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)
Mozart's Ave Verum Corpus

The video above can also be viewed here: Mozart - Ave verum corpus - Vienna boys choir

Ave Verum Corpus is a short Eucharistic hymn dating from the 14th century and attributed to Pope Innocent VI (d. 1362), which has been set to music by various composers. During the Middle Ages it was sung at the elevation of the host during the consecration. It was also used frequently during Benediction of the Blessed Sacrament.

The hymn's title means "Hail, true body", and is based on a poem deriving from a 14th-century manuscript from the Abbey of Reichenau, Lake Constance. The poem is a meditation on the Catholic belief in Jesus's Real Presence in the sacrament of the Eucharist, and ties it to Catholic ideas on the redemptive meaning of suffering in the life of all believers.

Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart's Ave Verum Corpus may be the most beautiful piece of music ever composed.

Mozart's setting of Ave verum corpus (K 618) was written for Anton Stoll (a friend of his and Haydn's) who was musical co-ordinator in the parish of Baden, near Vienna. It was composed to celebrate the feast of Corpus Christi and the autograph is dated 17 June 1791. It is only forty-six bars long and is scored for choir, stringed instruments, and organ. Mozart's manuscript itself contains minimal directions, with only a single sotto voce at the beginning.

Mozart composed this motet while in the middle of writing his opera Die Zauberflote, and while visiting his wife Constanze, who was pregnant with their sixth child and staying in a spa near Baden. It was less than six months before Mozart's death.

The text is in Latin, and reads:

Ave verum corpus, natum
De Maria Virgine,
Vere passum, immolatum
In cruce pro homine,
Cujus latus perforatum
Unda fluxit et sanguine,
Esto nobis praegustatum
In mortis examine.

A translation into English is:

Hail, true body,
Born of the Virgin Mary,
Truly suffered, sacrificed
On the Cross for mankind,
Whose pierced side
Flowed with water and blood,
Be for us a foretaste
In the trial of death.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, March 20, 2007 at 09:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)
Healthy Catholic #05 - Discipline

The video above can also be viewed here: Healthy Catholic #05 - Discipline

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, March 20, 2007 at 08:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, March 19, 2007
Healthy Catholic #04 - Balance

The video above is also available here: Healthy Catholic #04 - Balance

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, March 19, 2007 at 11:03 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, March 17, 2007
A Brief Examination Of Conscience


In Ictu Oculi, by Juan de Valdés Leal (1622-1690)
And he said to his disciples, "Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung round his neck and he were cast into the sea, than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin. (Luke 17:1=2)

Gaze down there into hell, and count the souls that are burning there today for a single mortal sin. Perhaps at this moment, there are in those fiery depths souls you have sent before you to prepare the way; unfortunate souls, who had not known sin until they met you; doomed souls, who yielded to your example, if not to your direct solicitation; lost souls, who were summoned to their reckoning, still burdened with the sins that you induced them to commit, without an instant in which to make their peace with God.” ~ Keep The Gate, Rev. Joseph J. Williams, S.J.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, March 17, 2007 at 12:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, March 16, 2007
Eucharistic Miracles: This is My Body, This is My Blood (Part Two)

The video above can also be viewed here: This is My Body, This is My Blood 2 of 5

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, March 16, 2007 at 01:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)
Healthy Catholic #03 - Arms and Legs

The video above can also be viewed here: Healthy Catholic #03 - Arms and Legs

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, March 16, 2007 at 01:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, March 15, 2007
Eucharistic Miracles: This is My Body, This is My Blood (Part One)


The video above can also be viewed here: This is My Body, This is My Blood 1 of 5

This will be the first in a five part series on Eucharistic miracles featuring the video, This is My Body, This is My Blood, with Bob and Penny Lord.

The first video deals with The Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano, Italy.

In the city of Lanciano, Italy, around A.D. 700, a priest of the Church of St. Legontian had trouble believing in the doctrine of Transubstantiation. During the Mass, when he uttered the words of consecration ("This is my Body...This is... my Blood"), he saw the bread transform into living flesh and the wine became living blood, which eventually coagulated into five globules, irregular and differing in shape and size. He was frightened and confused by the miracle, and stood a while as if in divine ecstasy, but eventually he turned his face to the congregation, and said, "Behold the Flesh and the blood of our Most Beloved Christ." At those words, the congregation members ran to the altar and began to cry for mercy.

Various ecclesiastical investigations have been conducted upon the miracle since 1574, and the evidence of the miracle remains in Lanciano to this day. In 1970-71, Professor Odoardo Linoli, eminent Professor in Anatomy and Pathological Histology and in Chemistry and Clinical Microscopy, and Professor Ruggero Bertelli of the University of Siena, conducted a scientific investigation into the miracle. The report was published in Quaderni Sclavo di Diagnostica Clinica e di Laboratori in 1971, and reaffirmed by a scientific commission appointed by the Higher Council of the World Health Organization in 1973. The following conclusions were drawn:

The Flesh of the miracle is real Flesh and the Blood is real Blood.

The Flesh and the Blood belong to the human species.

The Flesh consists of the muscular tissue of the heart, which would be impossible to obtain through dissection. [dubious — see talk page]

In the Flesh we see present in section: the myocardium, the endocardium, the vagus nerve and also the left ventricle of the heart for the large thickness of the myocardium. The Flesh is a heart complete in its essential structure.

The Flesh and the Blood have the same blood type, AB, which is also the same blood type found on the Shroud of Turin and all other Eucharistic Miracles.

In the Blood there were found proteins in the same normal proportions (percentage-wise) as are found in the sero-proteic make-up of the fresh normal blood.

In the Blood there were also found these minerals: chlorides, phosphorus, magnesium, potassium, sodium and calcium.

There is no trace whatsoever of any materials or agents used to preserve the Flesh or Blood.

The Flesh and Blood of the miracle can still be seen today. The Host-Flesh, which is the same size as the large Host used today in the Latin Church, is fibrous and light brown in colour, and becomes rose-coloured when lighted from the back. The Blood consists of five coagulated globules and has an earthly colour resembling the yellow of ochre.

For more details see: Physician Tells of Eucharistic Miracle of Lanciano

These miracles are an invitation to faith from God. Every Catholic should be familiar with them, because they are a tremendous help when sharing the faith with others.

This is one of the many things I love about our beautiful Catholic Faith: it is Universal. There is something in Catholicism to appeal to the heart and mind of every type of individual. St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas (among others) gave us lofty theological explanations that appeal to intellectuals, and God Himself provides miracles like this to confirm what the saints and theologians have told us in a way that can reach people of simple faith, while confounding human experts.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, March 15, 2007 at 08:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)
Healthy Catholic #02 - The Challenge

The video above can also be viewed here: Healthy Catholic #02 - The Challenge

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, March 15, 2007 at 08:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Healthy Catholic #01 - Body and Soul

The video above can also be viewed here: Healthy Catholic #01 - Body and Soul

I found this series of videos on YouTube last week. They're very good, and I think they're especially appropriate during Lent. I plan to post all of them.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, March 14, 2007 at 08:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, March 13, 2007
From "Sacramentum Caritatis": Pope Benedict XVI Upholds Celibacy For Priests, Ban On Communion For Remarried Divorced, And Discipline For Pro-Choice Politicians, & Makes Concrete Suggestions About The Mass
Pope Benedict XVI on Tuesday repeated the Church's constant teaching on matters of faith and morals, including the ban on Communion for divorced Catholics who remarry, and told Catholic politicians that Church teaching against abortion and gay marriage is "not negotiable."

Here's the story: Pope Upholds Celibacy For Priests, Ban On Communion For Remarried Divorced, And Discipline For Pro-Choice Politicians

The Holy Father also articulated some concrete suggestions for the Mass: Pope reflects on Eucharist, makes concrete suggestions for Mass

Here's his reflection on the Sign of Peace:

Pope Benedict said the sign of peace at Mass "has great value," especially in demonstrating the church's responsibility to pray for peace and unity in a world too often troubled by division, violence and hatred.
While Catholics at Mass should exchange a sign of peace with those near them, he also called for "greater restraint" to ensure the moment does not become one of irreparable distraction.

The pope said, "I have asked the competent curial offices to study the possibility of moving the sign of peace to another place (in the Mass), such as before the presentation of the gifts at the altar. To do so would also serve as a significant reminder of the Lord's insistence that we be reconciled with others before presenting our gifts to God."


You can read the actual document here: Sacramentum Caritatis

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, March 13, 2007 at 12:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (38) | TrackBack (0)
What Are They Doing In Bishop Harry Flynn's Diocese?


New Ways Ministry is holding a conference featuring a number of the dissenting Catholics listed in the post below. The conference is not sponsored by the Archdiocese of Saint Paul and Minneapolis, led by Archbishop Harry Joseph Flynn.

Check it out: New Ways Symposium, 2007

(Special thanks to RCB reader, Dude for sending the brochure.)

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, March 13, 2007 at 11:17 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)
Vatican Secretary of State: Dissident Catholics More Worrying than Atheists
Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican's Secretary of State, has said that dissident Catholics are more worrisome than atheists. Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone's comments were published in the December 7 edition of L'Avvenire, the official newspaper of the Italian bishops' conference.

Here's the story: Vatican Secretary of State: Dissident Catholics More Worrying than Atheists

Here's a quote:

Italian journalist Gianni Cardinale, asked Bertone about atheists who may support the Pope on certain issues such as his stance on Islam. "If I can put it in a sound-bite," Bertone said as translated by Vatican reporter John Allen, "the church doesn't really worry about atheists, however devout, because they're out of her spiritual jurisdiction, so to speak. Much more worrisome are those inside the church who work to distort its faith and moral principles, or who oppose the pope and his design for renewal of the church."
The new Secretary of State is, with these sentiments, very much in line with Pope Benedict. The Pope has paid special attention to Catholics who work to distort the faith and moral principles. Time and time again in meetings with bishops, especially those from the West, the Holy Father has insisted that they pay special attention to Catholic politicians who violate Church teaching on matters of life and family.


The Holy Father clearly understands the predominant errors of this present age. These errors were a large part of the "dictatorship of relativism" he mentioned in his speech before the conclave that ended with his election as Pope.

"We are moving," he declared, toward "a dictatorship of relativism . . . that recognizes nothing definite and leaves only one's own ego and one's own desires as the final measure."
Cardinal Bertone's words reflect the recognition that this dictatorship is attacking the faith not just from without, but also from within, as has been evidenced by Catholic conferences endorsed by Catholic laity, priests, religious, bishops, and even Cardinals where speakers who openly dissent from Church teaching on matters of faith an morals, particularly in the areas of sexual morality and the "ordination" of women. Groups such as Call to Action, known for their open dissent against Church teaching on these issues have been supported by dissenting priests and bishops for years. At the 1995 Call to Action conference, the controversial Bishop of Partenia, Jacques Gaillot, the auxiliary Bishop of Detroit Thomas Gumbleton, and theologian Hans Küng, who was rescinded his authority to teach Catholic theology, were among the featured speakers. Others who have supported Call to Action include: Bishop Raymond Lucker of New Ulm, Minnesota (deceased), Fr. Leonardo do Boff, Fr. Charles Curran, Sr. Ivone Gebara, Sr. Joan Chittister, Sr. Jeannine Gramick (of "New Ways Ministries"), Sr. Helen Prejean (of "Dead Man Walking"), Fr. Robert Nugent (of "New Ways Ministries"), Fr. Matthew Fox (of "Creation Spirituality"), Fr. Michael Crosby, Fr. Richard McBrien (of Notre Dame University), Bishop Pedro Casaldaliga, Bishop Raymond Hunthausen, Bishop Jacques Gaillot, Bishop Albert Ottenweller (retired) of Steubenville, Ohio, Bishop William Hughes (retired) of Covington, Kentucky, Edwina Gateley, and many, many more Catholic dissidents.

Let's pray that the confusion spread by these "Catholic" leaders will be undone so that the hearts and souls of many who have been led astray will hear the voice of the Lord, turn, and be converted. Let us also pray for these "Catholic" leaders, who have also been led astray. It's easy to see these dissenting leaders as the enemy, but we must remember that they are our brothers and sisters in Christ and they have been deceived, as all of us can be deceived. Just as we still love family members who abandon the Catholic faith, we must still love these Catholic dissenters. Just don't drink their Kool-Aid!

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, March 13, 2007 at 10:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (1)
More Sean Hannity Fallout Due To Legionary, Fr. Jonathan Morris
Fr. Jonathan Morris (born Aug 22, 1972 in Cleveland, Ohio), is the vice-rector of the Legionaries of Christ seminary in Rome. He is best known for his work for the Fox News Channel as a news contributor and analyst.

Fr. Morris wrote an open letter to Sean Hannity in the wake of Mr. Hannity's confrontation with Human Life International's president, Fr. Thomas J. Euteneuer, STL. In the letter, Fr. Morris was critical of Fr. Euteneuer and apologized to Sea Hannity for the way Fr. Euteneuer handled the situation.

You can read Fr. Morris' letter here: An Open Letter to Sean Hannity

The letter from Fr. Morris is disappointing, to say the least.

Fr. Euteneuer wrote this excellent letter in response: An Open Letter To Fox Analyst Father Jonathan Morris

Incidentally, Fr. Euteneuer wrote an excellent piece after his television appearance on Hannity & Colmes. You can read it here: Hannity the Liberal

Fr. Euteneuer has a blog, as well. Here it is: Spirit & Life

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, March 13, 2007 at 09:16 AM | Permalink | Comments (23) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, March 12, 2007
Sean Hannity & Fr. Thomas J. Euteneuer: Now On YouTube

The video above is also available here: Hannity Bullies Clergyman

Sean Hannity's embarrassing performance in this "discussion" is now being used against him by the Fox News haters at NewsHounds.

Hannity should have quit while he was behind. Now liberals are delighting in the fact that he is at odds with the Church and appears to bully priests with whom he disagrees.

You can contact Sean Hannity at this address: hannity@foxnews.com

Fr. Euteneuer also recently criticized the often controversial (and attention seeking) Fr. Andrew Greeley.

Here's the story on that: Priest belittled by Hannity criticizes renegade Greeley

Why not send Fr. Euteneuer a message of support? You should be able to contact him at this address: lhunt@hli.org

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, March 12, 2007 at 09:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (18) | TrackBack (0)
Pope Benedict XVI Ignores Protests Against Restoring The Tridentine Mass
The Australian is reporting that Pope benedict XVI has decided to go forward with the long awaited motu proprio on the Tridentine Mass, despite protests from "senior cardinals".

The article is available here: Pope ignores protests to restore Latin mass

Here are some significant details:

Pope Benedict XVI plans to bring back the celebration of mass in Latin, overriding a rare show of protest from senior cardinals.
With a papal decree said to be imminent, Catholic publishers in Rome are preparing new editions of the Latin missal.

They have sent proofs to Vatican authorities for approval, the Rome newspaper La Repubblica has reported.

Vatican sources said Benedict, who is fluent in Latin, is considering the publication of a papal motu proprio (literally, on his own initiative), which does not require the approval of church bodies.

This would enable Benedict to ignore opposition from several cardinals.

The decree would declare the Latin, or Tridentine, mass an "extraordinary universal rite", and the vernacular mass, with which most Catholics are familiar, an "ordinary universal rite".


We'll see what happens.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, March 12, 2007 at 08:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (21) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, March 10, 2007
Bishop Finn's Pastoral Letter On Pornography: Blessed Are the Pure in Heart


The Immaculate Conception, by Giovanni Battista Tiepolo

Bishop Robert W. Finn, of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph in Missouri, has written a pastoral letter on pornography. As Dr. Jeff Mirus of CatholicCulture.org says, "This is the most comprehensive episcopal statement yet on one of the thorniest problems of our time."

Dr. Mirus goes on to say:

Bishop Finn's letter covers all the bases, offering statistics showing the widespread negative impact of pornography on personal and family life, a rich Catholic perspective, an effective spiritual solution, and practical recommendations for fighting not only hard but smart. If you're facing this problem yourself or in your family, start with this outstanding guide.
The document is available here: Blessed Are the Pure in Heart

Back in the summer of 1988, when I attended the month-long retreat for the Militia of the Immaculata, before I made my formal consecration to the Immaculata through the MI Consecration Prayer, a terrific speaker named Barbara McGuigan came and taught all of us guys this prayer:

O Mary, by Your Immaculate Conception, make by body pure, and my soul holy.
It is a powerful prayer. The beauty and truth of the words and the power of the one petitioned struck me immediately, even then, and I wrote it down. I have never forgotten it.

In order to see the Most High God, we must be pure.

There is no purer human person than the Holy Mother of God. (Remember that Jesus is true God and true man, having the nature of God and a human nature composed of a body and a soul, but Jesus was not a human person. The Person of Jesus Christ is The Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. He is truly a man, yet the Person of Christ, the owner of that human nature, is the Person of God the Son. This is the doctrine of the hypostatic union and it is part of the mystery of the Incarnation.)

If we pray and ask Mary for help, persevering even if we fail, She will not refuse us. But you must keep asking.

Prayer and sin are diametrically opposed to one another. They cannot coexist in peace. One will either stop praying, or stop sinning.

The secret is not to stop praying, and the top secret is to ask for help from the Mother of God. It pleases God to send all graces to us through the hands of His Holy Mother. Ask Her, and keep asking. She will not abandon you.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, March 10, 2007 at 11:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)
Matt C. Abbott: On Sean Hannity's Heresy & Helping Catholic Journalist, Robert Kumpel
Catholic journalist, Matt C. Abbott has published an article covering two important stories.

The article is available here: Pro-life priest criticizes Sean Hannity; Catholic journalist in legal trouble

The first story deals with Human Life International President, Rev. Thomas J. Euteneuer, STL, who recently (and justifiably) criticized Catholic political commentator, Sean Hannity for his heretical stance on matters of faith and morals.

Fr. Euteneuer's recent article may be viewed here: Sean Hannity's Gospel

After writing his article, Fr. Euteneuer recently appeared on Hannity & Colmes to discuss his article with Sean Hannity and the video of his appearance is worth watching. Until it is up on YouTube, you can watch it by clicking here: Judgment Day: Priest claims Hannity's stance on birth control makes him a bad Catholic

Sean Hannity did not come off well in this segment, and I am embarrassed for him. It is shameful that he resorted to bashing the Church over the sex abuse scandals in order to help his own image.

It should also be mentioned that Sean Hannity has repeatedly stated on his programs that he opposes legal abortion, "except in cases of rape, incest, and saving the life of the mother". In other words, he supports legal abortion in cases of rape, incest, or to save the life of the pregnant mother.

I have never understood how someone could say they believe abortion is evil, and even murder, but then say that they support that evil form of murder for unborn babies if they are conceived through rape or incest. If it were moral to electively abort unborn babies in cases of rape or incest, it would logically follow that elective abortion is not intrinsically evil, in which case, why oppose abortion at all? Such a position amounts to saying that the value of innocent, unborn, human life is intrinsically bound to the comfort level of a pregnant mother about the circumstances surrounding her pregnancy, which is a fundamentally pro-abortion view.

Supporting legal, elective abortion in cases of rape or incest is an absurd position that seeks to appease the extreme case situations presented as excuses for abortion by abortion advocates. Agreeing with them on that point involves the implication that elective abortion is not intrinsically evil and is even moral in some instances, which inevitably leads to the slippery slope position that elective, legal abortion is a moral option in any circumstance.

Arguments in support of direct, elective abortion to save the life of a mother are equally problematic, because they involve the error of doing something intrinsically evil in order to avoid the loss of something good.

The moral law requires that we do good and avoid evil. We may never do evil, even in order to bring about a good. If we deliberately do evil to bring about some good, even the good of saving a human life, we unwittingly contradict the notion that there is such a thing as moral evil, and we unwittingly deny the golden rule: "And as you wish that men would do to you, do so to them." (Luke 6:31) A thief who steals unwittingly denies his own right to private property by his action; a position he would never support if you tried to steal from him. Yet in stealing, he implies that theft is moral, even though he knows in his heart it is not (because he would never want anyone to steal from him). The same is true for any person who deliberately does any evil act, even with the intention of bringing about some good effect. The deliberate commission of evil on the part of any human person (even in matters of venial sin) essentially denies the rectitude of God's eternal law and any belief in any kind of objective moral law (at least in practice). Yet nobody would maintain such a denial, if the same evil were to be done to them.

Cases where one willingly risks his or her life to save others are not the same thing. Although there is never a moral obligation to sacrifice one's life to save others, it is not a deliberate act of evil to do so, and that is the difference. The risk of death (or even the loss of one's own life) is an unintended secondary effect as a result of the primary action taken to save the life of another, whereas an act of direct, elective abortion involves doing an evil act first in order to bring about the good effect of saving a pregnant mother's life.

If Sean Hannity studied Theology in the seminary, as he said (and I don't doubt that he did), he read the wrong books and/or was misled by his instructors, or he deliberately chooses to ignore what he knows to be the teaching of the Church, because if he wants people to believe he is "in the know" he should know better.

You can contact Sean Hannity here: hannity@foxnews.com

Matt Abbott's second story deals with the ongoing legal troubles of Catholic journalist, Robert Kumpel.

I repeat my personal appeal for you to please do all that you can to help Robert Kumpel.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, March 10, 2007 at 01:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (15) | TrackBack (1)

Thursday, March 08, 2007
Another Interview With Cardinal Mahony


On Friday, March 2, 2007, at 11:15 a.m. PST, ChurchWerks.com hosted an online chat session with Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony, live from the main Exhibit Hall at the Religious Education Congress in Anaheim, California.
The text of that interview can be viewed here: Cardinal Mahony Online

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, March 08, 2007 at 09:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (35) | TrackBack (0)
California Catholic Daily's Exclusive Interview With Cardinal Mahony


California Catholic Daily has an eye-opening exclusive interview with Roger Cardinal Mahony.

You can read the interview here: Exclusive Interview with Cardinal Mahony

Then come back and share your thoughts.

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, March 08, 2007 at 06:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (33) | TrackBack (1)

Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Mahonyfest 2007: Footage From The Closing Mass

The video above is also available here: Closing Mass@Religious Education Congress 07

As you can see, Cardinal Mahony continues to ignore directives from the Holy See with respect to suitable Eucharistic vessels.

The video also shows the cardinal referring to the male and female altar servers as auxiliary bishops.

Then they bring on the dancers.

It looks like a different religion.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, March 07, 2007 at 02:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (33) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, March 03, 2007
Mahonyfest 2007


You can view a larger version here: Mahonyfest 2007

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 08:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0)
St. Thomas Aquinas: On Whether God Exists (Part Five)
This is the fifth post in a series of posts where I attempt to articulate St. Thomas Aquinas' five proofs for the existence of God in my own words.

The fifth way is from the order of things in the universe. We see that things that have no intelligence like insects, spiders, water, planets, molecules, atoms, etcetera, act with a purpose. They always, or nearly always, act in the same way to accomplish their end. They all have a sort of direction in which they are going. There are said to be "laws of nature" and "laws of physics". Law and order does not happen by accident (if they did, you would never need to clean your bedroom). It is the nature of things in the universe to deteriorate, not to come together into order. It therefore becomes evident that it is not merely happy coincidence that things act in this manner, but that they do so by design. An unintelligent thing that acts with a purpose must be being directed by intelligence, like an arrow that is shot by the intelligent archer. Therefore some intelligent being exists by whom all natural things are directed to their end; and this being we call God.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, March 03, 2007 at 04:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, March 02, 2007
St. Thomas Aquinas: On Whether God Exists (Part Four)
This is the fourth post in a series of posts where I attempt to articulate St. Thomas Aquinas' five proofs for the existence of God in my own words.

The fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some things that are more or less good, true, beautiful, sublime, etc. But degrees of perfection (which are indicated when we say “more” or “less” about any quality of being) are only discovered in things in accordance with their resemblance in different ways to the maximum of the considered perfection. So, there would be something that is truest, something best, something that is the maximum in beauty, and consequently something that is uttermost in being. The greatest thing in any genus is the cause of all things in that genus; as fire, which is the maximum heat, is the cause of all hot things. Therefore there must also be something that is to all beings the cause of their being, goodness, and every other perfection; and this we call God.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, March 02, 2007 at 01:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, March 01, 2007
St. Thomas Aquinas: On Whether God Exists (Part Three)
This is the third post in a series of posts where I attempt to articulate St. Thomas Aquinas' five proofs for the existence of God in my own words.

The third way is taken from possibility and necessity. We see in the world around us things that are possible to exist and not to exist, as they are generated (brought into being), and corrupted (degenerated). It follows from this that these things are possible to be (as they are seen to exist) and not to be (as they at one time were not in existence and will eventually corrupt and cease to be). It is impossible that a being that at one time did not exist and will cease to exist in the future should always have being, because everything that is possible to be at one time is not (as we have seen).

If everything that has being at one time did not exist, then this would demand that we admit that at one time there was literally nothing in existence. Yet if this were true, even now there would be nothing in existence, because out of nothing, nothing comes. That which has being can only be brought into being by an already existing being. If at one time nothing was in existence, it would have been impossible for anything to begin to exist; and thus even now nothing would be in existence - which is absurd.

Therefore, we must admit that not all beings are merely possible. There must exist some being the existence of which is necessary. Necessity is either caused by prior relation to some other being, or it is not. It is impossible to have an infinite regression of necessary beings that have their necessity caused by another being. It is not possible that there be an infinite regression of efficient causes of necessary being, because in the order of efficient causes, the first causes the intermediate cause, and the intermediate causes the ultimate cause. This holds true whether the intermediate causes be one or many. To remove the cause is to remove the effect. Therefore, if there were not a first cause among efficient causes, there would be no subsequent causes and consequently no effects, which is plainly false. Therefore we must admit the existence of some being having of itself its own necessity, and not receiving it from another, but rather causing in others their necessity. This all men speak of as God.

Let’s approach it from a different angle: Every being we see now exists at the present time, but at one time did not exist. These same beings will also at some time cease to exist; at least in their present state, but that only is only further indication their lack of necessity. But if we say that every being is contingent going back forever, then at some point nothing existed, because everything that exists at one time was nothing. But nothing comes from nothing. There must be something that has always had being that gave being to all of the other contingent beings. All of these contingent beings would be entirely dependent upon the Necessary Being for their very existence. God is the Necessary Being.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, March 01, 2007 at 08:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, February 28, 2007
St. Thomas Aquinas: On Whether God Exists (Part Two)
This is the second post in a series of posts where I attempt to articulate St. Thomas Aquinas' five proofs for the existence of God in my own words.

The second way to demonstrate the existence of God is from the nature of efficient cause. An efficient cause is that which brings another thing into being. It is not possible for anything to be the efficient cause of itself, for in order to do this, it would have to exist prior to its own existence, which is absurd.

This leaves one of two possibilities: The first possibility would be to hold that there is an infinite regression in the chain of efficient causes. However, it is not possible that there be an infinite regression of efficient causes and subsequent effects, because in the order of efficient causes, the first causes the intermediate cause, and the intermediate causes the ultimate cause. This holds true whether the intermediate causes be one or many. To remove the cause is to remove the effect. Therefore, if there were not a first cause among efficient causes, there would be no subsequent causes and consequently no effects, which is plainly false. Consequently, since to demand an infinite regression in the chain of cause and effect denies a first cause, it would logically follow that there are no effects in existence, which is absurd. It then plainly becomes necessary to admit the only alternative: that there is a first cause who is caused by no other and is the source of all subsequent beings in the sequence of causes and effects. This first cause is what we call God.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, February 28, 2007 at 07:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Los Angeles Religious Education Congress 2007: Another Festival Of Dissent
It's that time again. Roger Cardinal Mahony's annual festival of dissent, also known as the Los Angeles Religious Education Congress of 2007 is almost upon us.

Concerned Roman Catholics Of America have details of this years event here: Los Angeles Religious Education Congress 2007

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, February 27, 2007 at 11:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (29) | TrackBack (0)
St. Thomas Aquinas: On Whether God Exists (Part One)
Many of you will be familiar with St. Thomas Aquinas' five proofs for the existence of God. They can be found here: Whether God exists?

It is my intention to explain each of the five proofs for the existence of God in my own words over the next five days.

Today, we will examine the first proof.

The first and best way to demonstrate the existence of God from reason is the argument from motion. We know with certainty that some things are in motion, as is evident to our senses.

Whatever is in motion must be put in motion by another being, as nothing can be called moving except that which may potentially be moved. Until it is actually in motion, it is only potentially in motion. Motion is only actualized when a being is in the act of moving.

Motion is defined as the reduction of potency to act. Any movement is simply the changing progression from what is possible to what is actual. Nothing that is only possibly moving can actually move unless some other actually moving thing moves it. An example would be the way ice, which is actually cold, makes water, which is potentially cold, to be actually cold, and thereby moves and changes it.

It is not possible for the same thing to be in potency and act at the same time and in the same respect. What is actually hot cannot at the same time (and in the same respect) be potentially hot. In the same way, it is impossible that the same thing should be both actually moving and potentially moving at the same time and in the same way. It is therefore absurd to postulate that the same being should be both mover and moved, i.e. that it should move itself, for in order to move itself, what is possibly moving in one respect would have to be actually moving in the same respect, which is a contradiction.

It then follows that whatever is in motion is put in motion by another moving thing. Since the preceding mover must also have been put in motion by something moving, and that mover by another again, there are only two possibilities: The first possibility would be that there is an infinite regression of movers and things moved. However, this is impossible, because the postulation of an infinite regression demands that there be no first mover. Yet, if there were no first mover, then there would be no subsequent motion; i.e. nothing would ever move. Since this is plainly false, we must arrive at a first mover who is put in motion by no other. If another were to move the first mover, it could not be said to be first. As the first mover cannot be moved, it follows that the first mover can have no potential but must be pure act. This first mover is what we call God.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, February 27, 2007 at 10:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, February 22, 2007
Sr. Joan Is Full Of Chit
Sister Joan D. Chittister is a member of the Benedictine Sisters of Erie, Pennsylvania. She is known to dissent from Church teaching, especially with respect to the Church's teaching that the sacrament of Holy Orders can only be validly conferred to a man. She writes a column for the National Catholic Reporter. The National Catholic Reporter is often called the National Catholic Distorter, partly as a way to distinguish it from the National Catholic Register, which is published by The Legionaries of Christ, but mainly because the NCR is a newspaper that is known to support dissent from the Magisterium, and is one of the primary organs of Catholic dissent in the United States (along with the "Catholic" magazines Commonweal, America, and U.S. Catholic).

In 2006 Sr. Joan was an invited panalist on "Meet the Press" with Tim Russert; in 2004, a guest on "Now with Bill Moyers," and during the Papal funeral and election in April 2005, she was a commentator for the BBC from Rome. It seems likely that she was chosen to represent the Church on these broadcasts precisely because of her dissent and left leaning politics. It is maddening that these news organizations have Sr. Joan represent the Church at all, but even more so, since they seldom (if ever) tell viewers that Sr. Joan Chittister is heterodox, or at least that she is a dissenting Catholic nun.

Gerald at The Cafeteria Is Closed has called attention to the most recent, extremely problematic column Sr. Joan has written for the National Catholic Reporter: Moral relativism at work

Sr. Joan's most recent column is here: Morality: Is it a many-splendored thing?

The column begins by discussing the issues surrounding the drinking and driving laws in Ireland. Reasonable people can disagree about different ways to prevent people from driving while intoxicated, and thereby promote public safety. As for the morality of deliberate intoxication, that is clearly sinful, and if done with sufficient reflection and full consent, it is a mortal sin. Drunkenness is probably one of the more commonly committed sins, not only in Ireland, but all over the world. Deliberate drunkenness is an objectively serious sin. Whether or not individuals who become drunk do so with sufficient reflection and full consent requires individual examination, but the sin of drunkenness is to be avoided, even if it is commonly only a venial sin (in practice) due to various impediments to freedom. Traditionally the six hindrances to freedom which diminish culpability are: ignorance, concupiscence, habit, fear, violence, and hereditary taint. Those things can reduce culpability, but they never render deliberate drunkenness a valid moral option.

I explain all of that because Sr. Joan leads her readers down a slippery slope with twists and turns even more perilous than the dangerous roads of Ireland after all the pubs close and the roads are filled with inebriated drivers on their way home to sleep off the whiskey.

She shifts the discussion from drunk driving in Ireland to all sorts of moral issues of concern throughout the world and describes how some parts of the world deal with these issues in exactly opposite ways. Many of these issues are handled in ways that are seriously incompatible with Christian morality, yet Sr. Joan describes them as though they are just another (equally valid) perspective.

Here's a quote:

The Irish with almost two million cars for a country of barely four million people and a road death rate that is one of the highest in Europe takes drunk-driving, which figures in over 36 percent of all traffic deaths, very seriously these days. But the accident rate is only one side of the issue.
Nothing is simple. Unfortunately, almost nothing is one-dimensional either. It's precisely the complexity and multiple levels of any social question that threaten both the moral and the social consensus of societies. There's a lot of truth on most sides of every question.

In the United States, those troublesome social questions include things like abortion, homosexuality, capital punishment, war and immigration. To people on either side of those issues, the questions seem clear, irrefutable, clearly moral or immoral.

To many people, for instance, abortion is about taking human life and so is clearly murder. Capital punishment is the application of justice and is, therefore, moral. Homosexuality is simply "natural" and therefore not immoral. War is state terrorism that takes innocent human life and is certainly immoral. Supporting illegal aliens breaks laws and so is obviously immoral.

At the same time, to many others, these same issues are all just the opposite. So these, we say, are the major moral questions of the age.

But not so fast. In other societies, the perspective shifts. Other issues take moral priority. In the Netherlands, for instance, prostitution is legal. In China, abortion is not "permitted," it is a political imperative. In a growing number of European nations – Belgium, Scandinavia, Holland and Spain, for instance, and even in South Africa – same-sex marriage is a legal option.

Obviously, the moral and the legal take on a different hue in different environments.


Sr. Joan then goes back to talking about drunk driving in Ireland:

In Ireland, for instance, the thing that has the Irish struggling for moral rectitude these days may seem to us to be light years away from being a serious governmental issue. But the decline of the pub culture in Ireland and the role of the government in maintaining it has become a major moral question. Since the advent of smoking bans and drunk-driving regulations , the traditional Irish pub has been dealt "a mighty blow.' Pubs, the surveys say, have been closing in Ireland at the rate of one a day every day for the last two years. (Sheridan, "One for the Road?" The Irish Times, January 13, 2007, Weekend Review, p.1)
Listen carefully and you can almost hear the cheers of those who equate liquor with sin. But is it -- is anything -- really that simple?

In the cities, for instance, pubs are barely touched by the bans. There's always the billion dollar Dart, the Luas, and the cab companies to cart drinkers home after a night of "good craic", the Irish equivalent of a roisterous good time.

But in rural Ireland, in the country, there's nothing. No cabs. No public transportation. No possible way to walk back and forth to the pub from the far-flung cottages that dot the hills.

For these country people, many of them old bachelors, the church and the village pubs are the only social life they have. Even now. The men -- inheritors of the tiny patches of grazing land, stayed in the country to farm. The women -- who for centuries could never inherit the land -- went into the city to get a job. Many of the men are still here. Alone.

There's a proposal afloat that the government should provide a Nite-link bus service to enable a safe and steady form of transportation to and from the pubs. But should they?

That's supporting drunkenness, one side says, and that's immoral -- and besides there aren't that many bachelors and if there are, we can simply relax the road regulations for them.

The other side says they're not supporting drunkenness, they're supporting good mental health and a necessary social system. The law is the law and must be universally applied. And there are plenty of bachelors.

An EU-funded survey of 165 men, ranging in age from 18-65, in fact, found that more than 20 percent of them lived alone, 70 percent had poor reading skills, 58 percent of them went to church regularly but only 15 percent visited their neighbors. For 77 percent, the survey reports, the pub was their main or only social outlet, the place they go "to meet people."

Another study of single, older men, finds that 23 percent of them reported depression or suicidal feelings.

"Very few will say that its' about drink," a supporter of the bill argued. "It's to meet up – for the story-telling, the darts....That's all been taken away."

If the pub – if alcohol – isn't available, others argue, these isolated men will turn to drugs. Then, they say, the society as well as the men will have a real moral problem to deal with.

So what's really "moral" here? The accident rate is down and that's to be applauded. But the isolation rate is up, and that's regrettable.

It looks to me as if we can all take a lesson from what is a far less impacting moral question for us now – but which we struggled over with a great sense of righteousness less than 75 years ago.


Whoa, Nelly! (That isn't meant to be a swipe at Sr. Joan's horsey smile.)

It's an expression of admiration at how carefully Sr. Joan has described the external accidents surrounding a sin that has been somewhat normalized, but is still not a moral option (despite any sympathetic circumstances she offers), and one with which many people can relate. She attempts to create sympathy for the sinners so that we accept their sin.

Then she concludes with an astounding statement:

From where I stand, it seems to me that absolutizing the arguable is a dangerous path to take if we want to preserve all the truth there is in every issue. Unless we learn to listen to all sides of every moral question, we stand to tear the very fabric of the society to pieces. What's worse, we may never develop much real morality at all.
After reading that conclusion, I had to wonder if Sr. Joan was sipping Irish whiskey when she wrote that article, or when she was taught Philosophy and Theology (if she ever learned authentic methods of approaching both subjects during her impressive education – it's quite possible she was only taught those subjects from a perspective that only mentioned the Church's perspective as one of many options, and not necessarily the best perspective at that).

The moral law does not change. The way to determine the morality of any human action is to examine the object of the action (which is to say the action considered objectively, in itself – it is a consideration of the essence or nature of the act). Human actions are either morally good, morally neutral, or intrinsically evil. An intrinsically evil act is an act that is evil by definition, by nature, by essence. Such acts are incapable of being ordered towards God. One must also consider the circumstances surrounding the action. These external accidents can modify an action and render an action that would be good evil. An example of this would be the marriage act. It is morally good in marriage, but not outside of marriage. Finally, one must consider the intentions of the agent (the person performing the moral act). Evil intentions can render objectively good acts evil. An example would be taking on the appearance of virtue, (perhaps through concern for social justice and the poor, or concern for the environment) but with an evil motive, such as to distract people from the fact that one supports the intrinsic evils of abortion and infanticide.

The object, circumstances, and intentions of any human action must all be morally good, or at least neutral. If any one of the three is evil, the action may not be performed. Think of each element of a moral act, the object, the circumstances, and the intention as being a separate river flowing into a reservoir. If any one of the rivers is polluted, the whole reservoir will be polluted.

Once the action is determined to be immoral, all that remains is to determine whether the matter of the sin is objectively serious. If it is not, the sin will be a venial sin.

Venial sin is a lesser offense against God's eternal law, but it is still an expression of the will of a finite creature set in opposition to the eternal law of God. Venial sins are not "okay". They are to be avoided, because they habituate the soul to view opposition to God as normal and acceptable. They darken the intellect and weaken the will, and they dispose the soul to fall into mortal sin with greater ease.

If the matter of the sin is objectively serious, and the action is done with sufficient reflection and full consent, the sin is mortal. A mortal sin destroys sanctifying grace. Sanctifying grace, or habitual grace, is a created share of God's Divine life. It increases through acts of virtue done for the love of God and is lost through mortal sin. Souls who die in mortal sin (which is to say that they are lacking in sanctifying grace) will be damned to hell for all eternity. Mortal sin can only be forgiven through an act of perfect contrition (which involves perfect sorrow for having committed the sin, not only out of the fear of hell, but primarily because the sin offended God, Who is All Good and worthy of all our love, and a firm resolution of amendment, i.e. to not commit the sin again). If you suspect you are guilty of mortal sin, it is advisable to make an act of perfect contrition as soon as possible, and then get to confession as soon as possible. It is hard, sometimes, to recognize and muster up the sense that the primary reason we should be sorry is that we have offended the God who loves us ad wants us to be happy with Him forever in eternity, but it is easier to do if one reflects on the fact that sin was the reason for the Passion and Death of Jesus. Sorrow for having been the cause of His excruciating suffering is often a laudable means of attaining the remorse required for perfect contrition. Imperfect contrition, which is sorrow for a sin primarily out of fear of hell coupled with a firm resolution of amendment, i.e. to not commit the sin again, is sufficient for the restoration of sanctifying grace only in conjunction with the sacrament of confession.

These things are so important for Catholics to know. Hopefully, they are not news to you. Hopefully, you hear them frequently from the priests and bishops who have been given the charge of shepherding your soul.

Saving your own soul is your primary goal in this life on earth. Leading other souls to heaven is equally important, because we must love our neighbor as ourself.

What does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and yet suffer the loss of his soul?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, February 22, 2007 at 02:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (33) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, February 19, 2007
While Anglicans Scramble To Return To Orthodoxy, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor Upsets Orthodox Catholics With "Gay" Masses
The London Telegraph reports that "homosexual rights campaigners have gained permission from the head of the Catholic Church in England and Wales to hold Mass for gay parishioners."

Here's the story: Cardinal's permission for gays' Mass dismays Catholic traditionalists

Why do homosexuals need a special Mass? What does it accomplish? Why isn't the Mass everyone attends good enough for homosexuals? What is the reasoning behind the perceived need for a separate, special Mass for homosexuals?

Does this mean we can expect separate, special Masses for fornicators, adulterers, or thieves?

Racism is a disordered orientation and it is sinful to practice acts of racism. Should we have special Masses for white supremacists?

I can understand having Masses for people who speak different languages, but I am confused about why there is a need to single out homosexuals as needing separate Masses.

It seems to me that a white supremacist Mass would scandalize people and tempt people to believe that members of the Catholic Church were endorsing white supremacy. Why don't people realize that having special, separate Masses for homosexuals scandalize people and tempt people to believe that members of the Catholic Church are endorsing homosexuality?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, February 19, 2007 at 07:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (35) | TrackBack (0)
An Anglican Reunion With Rome?
Henry VIII's "reforms" appear to be unravelling rapidly.

The Times Online reports that "radical proposals to reunite Anglicans with the Roman Catholic Church under the leadership of the Pope are to be published this year".

This is an interesting development. Here's the story: Churches back plan to unite under Pope

According to the Times:

The proposals have been agreed by senior bishops of both churches.
In a 42-page statement prepared by an international commission of both churches, Anglicans and Roman Catholics are urged to explore how they might reunite under the Pope.

The statement, leaked to The Times, is being considered by the Vatican, where Catholic bishops are preparing a formal response.

It comes as the archbishops who lead the 38 provinces of the Anglican Communion meet in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, in an attempt to avoid schism over gay ordination and other liberal doctrines that have taken hold in parts of the Western Church.

The 36 primates at the gathering will be aware that the Pope, while still a cardinal, sent a message of support to the orthodox wing of the Episcopal Church of the US as it struggled to cope with the fallout after the ordination of the gay bishop Gene Robinson.

Were this week’s discussions to lead to a split between liberals and conservatives, many of the former objections in Rome to a reunion with Anglican conservatives would disappear. Many of those Anglicans who object most strongly to gay ordination also oppose the ordination of women priests.

Rome has already shown itself willing to be flexible on the subject of celibacywhen it received dozens of married priests from the Church of England into the Catholic priesthood after they left over the issue of women’s ordination.

There are about 78 million Anglicans, compared with a billion Roman Catholics, worldwide. In England and Wales, the Catholic Church is set to overtake Anglicanism as the predominant Christian denomination for the first time since the Reformation, thanks to immigration from Catholic countries.


The religion reporting from the Times has not impressed me in the past, so I take this story with a grain of salt, but it is a hopeful sign.

Can any readers shed more light on the situation?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, February 19, 2007 at 07:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, February 18, 2007
Roger Cardinal Mahony's "Friends & Lovers"
California Catholic Daily has a report on "homoerotic art featured at auction held Saturday at Our Lady of the Angels Cathedral to benefit AIDS clinics in Mexico".

Here's the story: “Friends and Lovers”

Here's a sample from the article:

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation held an art exhibition and auction last night at the conference center of Our Lady of the Angels Cathedral in Los Angeles to raise money for clinics it sponsors in Tijuana and Puerto Vallarta, Mexico.
A California Catholic Daily reader who saw a preview of the event on a Los Angeles television program alerted the newsaper via email regarding the event. "They showed some of the items, and it was really gross -- men hugging, tops bared, nude males back scenes," said the reader in the email.

The title for the event was “Amigos y Amantes” (Friends and Lovers).

“Showcasing the work of notable and emerging Latino artists, this lively celebration of Latino art and culture will take place on Saturday, February 10th from 6:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels Conference Room in downtown Los Angeles. Entrance is $25.00 and includes complimentary appetizers and no host bar,” said an AIDS Healthcare Foundation flyer promoting the event.

Among the artists whose works were on display were Joey Terrill and Miguel Angel Reyes. A biography on the AIDS Healthcare Foundation website has this to say of Terrill: “a man whose art and identity -- as a Latino, a gay man, a person living with HIV, an activist and an artist -- have always been closely connected. Several of Joey’s paintings, which often document his relationships with friends, lovers and family, will be up for auction as part of AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s art exhibition and fundraiser to benefit its free AIDS treatment clinics in Mexico.”

And, of Reyes, the website offers this insight: “Miguel counts as a primary influence his friendship with Morris Kight, gay civil rights pioneer and AIDS activist, whom many consider to be the founder of the West Coast gay rights movement. When they met, Morris was older than Miguel by more than forty years.

“When asked about his current projects, Miguel offers: ‘I’m working on a series of drawings of men grooming -- combing their hair, taking a shower, drying themselves. Simple, everyday actions.’ He adds with a laugh, ‘Naked, of course.’”

A highly-stylized piece of art by Reyes featured on the website pictures two shirtless, barefoot men facing each other with the caption, “In the Future, Everyone Will be Able to Play with Themselves.”


What can be said about this? It can't be surprising – not in the Archdiocese of the rainbow fish: Cd. Mahony's fishy fish lure

How much more confusion must be tolerated? Doesn't Rome realize that by appearing to do nothing, Catholics are confused. Don't they know that progressives point to Mahony and say that Pope John Paul II made him a bishop, and then a cardinal, and Pope Benedict XVI continues to allow him to remain in authority, without correction, in Los Angeles, and therefore what Mahony is doing must be okay with the Church?

Why must we wait for his retirement, to the detriment of millions of souls?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, February 18, 2007 at 04:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (20) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Atheists Make Their Case

The video above is also available here: Dawkins talks atheism

I am always amused when atheists claim to be sweet, harmless people.

Atheistic Communism killed 100 million people in the 20th century. That's more people than the combined total of all the people who have been killed by all the religious wars fought throughout history.

Any comments?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, February 13, 2007 at 09:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (49) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, February 09, 2007
The Most Reverend George Niederauer, the Archbishop of San Francisco
Archbishop George Hugh Niederauer recently gave a radio interview during which he expressed his thoughts on homosexual adoption. He also discussed Nancy Pelosi, homosexual priests, the Iraq war, the sex abuse scandals within the Church, vocations and inviting disaffected Catholics back to the Church.

The entire interview is available here: Full text of Archbishop George Niederauer’s Feb. 4 remarks on KCBS Radio, San Francisco

Here are some quotes...

On Nancy Pelosi:

Ed Cavagnaro: Now, one of your own flock, a Catholic woman from San Francisco, is now one of the most powerful people in all the country. Nancy Pelosi, a Catholic from San Francisco, is the Speaker of the House. She is not only pro-choice, but she would be someone who would be working to try to keep abortion legal. In your view is she less of a Catholic because of that?
Archbishop George Niederauer: Well, I have met on one occasion, with Speaker Pelosi, before she was Speaker Pelosi. It was last year. And I -- we’ve -- exchanged viewpoints on a number of things. At that time, it was last spring, and it was principally about immigration, because that was very much the hot-button topic of the time. We haven’t had an opportunity to talk about the life issues. I would very much welcome that opportunity, but I don’t believe that I am in a position to say what I understand her stand to be, if I haven’t had a chance to talk to her about it. I think that when I said earlier dialog is very important, that means dialog with anybody, whether it’s the Speaker of the House of Representatives, or somebody in the pew on Sunday who doesn’t understand or accept what they hear from the pulpit.

Ed Cavagnaro: Of course, she has a big say in the direction of the country and the legislative agenda, certainly. Other than this issue, 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.


On homosexual adoption:

Ed Cavagnaro: Last year you faced the issue of gay adoption, when the Church announced that children should not be placed in same-sex households. But you worked out a solution that allowed Catholic Charities to still participate in placing children. Explain how that worked and do you see more issue being settled in this way?
Archbishop George Niederauer: Well, I don’t know about other issues being settled in that way, but I think what we were after was some participation in the work of finding families for children who needed adopting. And, after all, that’s what you focus on. You don’t – the most important person in the adoption is the child. Important as it is for couples to be able to adopt a child if they want to, it’s most important of all that the child have a home, Now the Church’s teaching is that the model for that is a father and a mother, so that’s the paradigm that we would insist upon. So, because we could no longer make that distinction, because of State law, what we found, and I’m really very happy with the decision made by the Catholic Charities CEO, on that, was to work with the program on the Internet for finding homes for children, posting their pictures and being able to guide people who would be interested in this particular child to an adoption agency which could handle the situation. Now there are those within the Church, and I understand and respect their opinion, who feel that’s, even that is too much of an involvement, but I believe we have examined what we’re doing and vetted it very carefully and what we’re really doing is putting potential adoptive parents in touch with adoption agencies that can help them. I notice that there is a, from the newspapers, that Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor in Westminster in London is meeting some of the same questions currently.


On homosexual priests:

Ed Cavagnaro: I think you’ve said that sexual orientation had nothing to do with the clergy abuse cases, in your view, or at least to a large degree.
Archbishop George Niederauer: It has seemed to me not, yeah.

Ed Cavagnaro: And do gay men, in your view, are they eligible for the priesthood?

Archbishop George Niederauer: What the Vatican directive is that I am in agreement with is that a candidate for priesthood has to be able to be celibate, has to have no commitment to, or engagement with, a sexual orientation which is going to make it difficult for him to be able to live a priestly life. I think the expectation of our people is that they’re going to call the priest Father and they are going to expect him to be a model of priestly virtue and in a sense in the image of Christ – that’s our teaching about priesthood – and I think it is the expectation of our people, and it’s one that I as archbishop, and that our faculty at the seminary, has to implement.


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, February 09, 2007 at 06:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (33) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Are Atheists Under Attack?

The video above is also available here: Atheists Attacked in America

I agree with the statement that militant atheism is bad for atheists.

That being said, I don't think atheists experience anywhere near the abuse that Christians receive from secular progressives.

Side note: Has anyone else ever heard of atheists referred to as non-theistic Americans? That's a new one in the political correctness lexicon for me.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 at 06:52 PM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)
Rudy Giuliani On Hannity & Colmes

The video above is also available here: Rudy Giuliani on Hannity & Colmes (Part 1 of 2)


The video above is also available here: Rudy Giuliani on Hannity & Colmes (Part 2 of 2)

Instead of sharing my thoughts, I'd rather hear yours.

Is his stance on judicial appointments enough to overcome his position that people should ultimately be allowed to "choose" to abort?

Any other thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, February 06, 2007 at 03:09 AM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (1)

Sunday, February 04, 2007
Drinan's Funeral
Details of "abortion rights" advocate, and Democratic party Representative for the 3rd Congressional District of Massachusetts from 1971 until 1981, Fr. Robert Drinan's funeral are available here: Drinan's courage, commitment recalled

Here's a bit of the article:

The Rev. Robert Drinan , a Roman Catholic priest who was forced to choose between the priesthood and a career as a Massachusetts congressman, was remembered yesterday by colleagues in the clergy and the Congress as a man who committed his life to advancing human rights and justice.
Drinan, a former Boston College administrator who died Sunday at age of 86, was the first priest to win election to the House of Representatives, where he served from 1971 to 1981. One of the chamber's most liberal lawmakers, Drinan became an outspoken opponent of the Vietnam War and an architect of the effort to impeach President Richard M. Nixon.

Despite his faith, Drinan supported abortion rights -- a controversial stance that put him at odds with his church and underscored Drinan's competing commitments to his faith and to the voters in his progressive Massachusetts district.

"On the immensely painful subject of abortion, there was conflict and tension, a conflict I wish neither to minimize or to revisit, but only to put in the context of a common concern for the well-being of women and children in a society racked by moral disagreement," said the Rev. John Langan, who delivered the homily at Drinan's funeral yesterday at the Church of Saint Aloysius Gonzaga in Washington.

But Langan expressed an understanding of Drinan's political views on the issue, despite the opposition of the church. The shape of legislation, he said, "can be a matter for prudential disagreement, not an issue of faithfulness."

Drinan left Congress after five terms, when Pope John Paul II gave him an ultimatum in 1980: Leave political office or leave the priesthood.

Drinan said he chose to leave politics "with regret and pain." He became a professor of international human rights, legal ethics, and constitutional law at Georgetown University Law Center, a job he performed with enthusiasm and passion for 26 years until his death.

In a eulogy to her former colleague, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi , Democrat of California, recalled Drinan's dedication to the House and noted that even decades after leaving politics, he still kept a politician's interest in the institution. Just weeks before he died of pneumonia and congestive heart failure, Drinan celebrated a Mass at Trinity College, Pelosi's alma mater, in honor of the children of Hurricane Katrina and the conflict in Darfur.

Pelosi, moved by Drinan's exhortation to make the welfare of children a foreign policy objective, inquired about getting a copy of her former colleague's remarks. She was told he had already sent them along to her -- accompanied by a request that she put it in the Congressional Record. Pelosi did so earlier this week.

When Drinan left Capitol Hill, Pelosi added, "he knew that Massachusetts would be in the good hands of [Senator Edward M.] Kennedy," the Bay State's senior senator and a good friend of Drinan's.

"And I know that he was happy to know that the [congressional] district would be in the good hands of Barney Frank," Pelosi added . Frank was one of many lawmakers at the service yesterday, including several members of the Massachusetts delegation.


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, February 04, 2007 at 04:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBack (0)
Occult Watch: So-called "Psychic", Sylvia Browne - An Ex-Catholic & Parochial School Teacher Of Seventeen Years
You may or may not be familiar with Sylvia Browne. She is a frequent guest on the Montel Williams Show and Larry King Live.

She made headlines recently when it was revealed that she erroneously told the family of Shawn Hornbeck that he was dead. See: Psychic Told The Family That Shawn Hornbeck Was Dead

According to Wikipedia's entry for Sylvia Browne:

11-year-old Shawn Hornbeck was reported missing from his Missouri home on October 6, 2002. On February 6, 2003, Browne appeared on the Montel Williams Show with the boy's parents during which Browne told Pam and Craig Akers their son "is no longer with us" but she had the impression his body was in a wooded area about 20 miles southwest of Richwoods. She said it would be near two large, jagged boulders that seem out of place in that area. She also described the man as being very tall, having long black dreadlocks, and being not "black, more like Hispanic" as well as describing his vehicle as an older model blue sedan with fins. Her claims led to a refocusing of search efforts of numerous people calling in with tips regarding possible spottings of the rock formations Browne had mentioned.
Sickening.

What you may not know is that Sylvia Browne has founded a branch of "Gnostic Christians". Check out her website for the "Society of Novus Spiritus": Novus Spiritus

Quote from Sylvia Browne's website endorsing her "Society of Novus Spiritus":

In April 1986, Sylvia Browne embarked upon the most important chapter of her life. She founded a spiritual organization called Society of Novus Spiritus. This decision was a natural extension of her love for God and for all of humanity. Novus is Sylvia's monument to God, a forum to express the joy and love that is God - with no fear, no guilt, no sin, no hell, and no Satan. Through Novus, Sylvia gives the world a means to understand God, Life, and the reason for Being.
Sylvia's life has always revolved around God, being raised and educated in the Catholic faith, then going on to teach in the parochial school system for seventeen years. In addition, she has an unparalleled psychic ability. Since her late teens, Sylvia has been using her gift to help thousands of people. This prophetic ability has been tested many times, and each test turns into another testimonial of paranormal cognition.

The end result of Sylvia's devotion to God, and her gift of prophecy, is Novus Spiritus. Combining His love, with direct revelation of His plan, creates a New Spirit and a new understanding about life. Is this new view of life true? Each individual must make that decision, for we always say:

"Take what you like and leave the rest behind."


I'll leave all of Sylvia Browne's goofy nonsense behind, thanks.

Oddly enough, I am not surprised in the least that Sylvia Browne's personal history includes having been "raised and educated in the Catholic faith, then going on to teach in the parochial school system for seventeen years."

One shudders to think of the goofy, "gnostic" nonsense she taught children for "seventeen years".

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, February 04, 2007 at 03:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)
One Of Many Gifts To America From The Clinton Administration: Former Surgeon General, Dr. Joycelyn Elders


The video above is also available here: The Word - Joycelyn Elders and Masturbation

"The Word" - A short video from 1994 by Rich N Famous making light of Joycelyn Elders' comment that "masturbation should be taught in schools", which caused dozens of TV talking heads to reluctantly utter the word "masturbation" while discussing the issue. (Apologies for the poor video quality.)

On a more serious note (and with better video quality) let's let Dr. Joycelyn Elders speak freely:


The video above is also available here: Joycelyn Elders

Minnie Joycelyn Elders (born August 13, 1933) was the United States Surgeon General during the Clinton administration from September 8, 1993 to December 31, 1994, most famous for her outspokenness on sensitive issues of public health.

From Wikipedia:

In 1987 Governor Bill Clinton appointed Elders Director of the Arkansas Department of Health. Her accomplishments in this position included a tenfold increase in the number of early childhood screenings annually and almost a doubling of the immunization rate for two-year-olds in Arkansas. In 1992, she was elected President of the Association of State and Territorial Health Officers.
In 1993 after Clinton was elected president, he appointed her United States Surgeon General, making her the first African American, and the second woman, to hold the position (Antonia Novello was the first). As surgeon general, Elders quickly established a reputation for controversy. Like many of the surgeons general before her, she was an outspoken advocate of a variety of health-related causes, some of which were quite unconventional. She argued for an exploration of the possibility of drug legalization, and she was a strong backer of President Clinton's plan for national health care.

In 1994, she was invited to speak at a United Nations conference on AIDS. She was asked whether it would be appropriate to promote masturbation as a means of preventing young people from engaging in riskier forms of sexual activity, and she replied, "I think that it is part of human sexuality, and perhaps it should be taught."


Other quotes from Dr. Joycelyn Elders:

"We must stop this love affair with the fetus." - 1993
"The number of Down’s Syndrome infants in Washington state in 1976 was 64% lower than it would have been without legal abortion."

"As long as I was in Washington I never met anybody that I thought was good enough, who knew enough or who loved enough to make sexual decisions for anybody else."


As you can see, Dr. Joycelyn Elders, albeit a bit of a punch-line, is a staunch advocate for ideas that run contrary to Christian morality. Secular progressive liberals believe in the things she's saying. They just wish she wouldn't embarrass them by letting people know it, because it hurts their cause.

Hillary Clinton's presidential run is definitely going to involve an amusing walk down memory lane.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, February 04, 2007 at 01:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, February 01, 2007
'Mama's Boys' Unfit To Stay Wed, Says Rome
Over-dependence upon a parent has been ruled grounds for annulment by the Roman Rota.

Here's the story: 'Mummy's boys' unfit to stay wed, says Rome

Here's a quote:

Officials ruled on several cases of men and women who were judged to be so dependent on a parent that they were unfit for marriage.
Judges on the Roman Rota, the top Catholic tribunal in the Vatican, agreed for an undisclosed number of marriages to be annulled on such grounds, according to a review of the judicial year.

They ruled that the "overbearing influence of a mother or father meant that the psychological autonomy needed for marriage was lacking".


Here's more:

According to the statistics released for 2005, the judges approved just 67 marriage annulments after looking at 1,637 cases. Appeals for marriage annulments were increasing and that, although they arrived from 27 countries, the largest number, 127, came from Italy.
Pope Benedict XVI appealed to judges on the panel not to grant annulments freely and said: "Marriage is not a legal structure than human desire can manipulate at its will."


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, February 01, 2007 at 07:57 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)
Pope Benedict XVI: The Saints Weren't Perfect
Pope Benedict XVI has explained that the saints weren't perfect, and that holiness is something everyone can learn.

Here's the story: Saints Weren't Perfect, Pope Says

Here's the text of the story:

VATICAN CITY, JAN. 31, 2007 (Zenit.org).- The saints are not people who never made mistakes or sinned, but who repented and were reconciled, says Benedict XVI.
This fact is a personal consolation for the Pope himself, as he explained in today's general audience.

Addressing some 6,000 people in Paul VI Hall, the Holy Father dedicated his weekly address to focus on three of St. Paul's closest collaborators: Barnabas, Silas and Apollos.

The Pontiff explained that on occasions Paul had confrontations with them, at least with Barnabas, because of differences of opinion on specific questions.

"Hence, also among saints there are oppositions, discords and controversies And this is very consoling for me, as we see that the saints have not 'fallen from heaven,'" the Holy Father said.

"They are men like us, with complicated problems. Holiness does not consist in not making mistakes or never sinning," Benedict XVI continued. "Holiness grows with the capacity for conversion, repentance, willingness to begin again, and above all with the capacity for reconciliation and forgiveness.

"And we can all learn this way of holiness."

The Pope's address continued with the series of meditations he has been giving on the first apostles and evangelizers of the early Church.


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, February 01, 2007 at 07:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
A Priest Writes To Nancy Pelosi
The image to the left is from the Rock For Life website. You can enlarge the image by clicking on it.

Fr. John Malloy, pastor of Saints Peter and Paul Church in San Francisco, has written an “Open letter to Nancy Pelosi,” which he also published in his parish bulletin.

California Catholic Daily has the story here: A priest writes to Nancy Pelosi

Here is the text of Fr. Malloy's letter:

Nancy, you are fooling yourself and I fear fooling many good Catholics. You are simply not in sync with the Catholic Church. Until you change your non-Catholic positions, you should stop calling yourself Catholic. Your record shows that you support embryonic stem cell research, Planned Parenthood, contraception, family planning funding, allowing minors to have an abortion without parental consent, and are against making it a crime to harm a fetus, etc. etc.

The fact that you favor married priests and women priests certainly would not classify you as conservative, but your answer to the question are you a conservative Catholic was:
“I think so. I was raised in a very strict upbringing in a Catholic home where we respected people, were observant, were practicing Catholics, and that the fundamental belief was that God gave us all a free will, and we were accountable for that, each of us. Each person had that accountability, so it wasn’t for us to make judgments about how people saw their responsibility and that it wasn’t for politicians to make decisions about how people led their personal lives; certainly, to a high moral standards, but when it got into decisions about privacy and all the rest, then that was something that individuals had to answer to God for, and not to politicians.”

That sounds fair and tolerant, but your record belies high moral standards.

The NARL rates you 100% pro-abortion. Your statement: “To me it isn’t even a question. God has given us a free will. We’re all responsible for our actions. If you don’t want an abortion, you don’t believe in it, [then] don’t have one. But don’t tell somebody else what they can do in terms of honoring their responsibilities. My family is very pro-life. They’re not fanatics and they’re not activists. I think they’d like it if I were not so vocally pro-choice.”

Do we not elect politicians to make laws that help people honor their responsibilities, such as protecting life itself? Can politicians not tell someone else not to kill? If you can kill a baby in the womb, Nancy, why not outside of it? Oh wait, you are in favor of partial birth abortion, so-called because the baby sticks out of the “mother” about halfway, while the “doctor” sucks out the baby's brain. That seems comparable to the choice the Nazis made killing six million Jews.

Yes, Nancy, we (together with your pro-life family) would all like it if you were not so vocally pro-choice, i.e. pro-death. Until your choice is in line with Catholic doctrine, please, Nancy, do not receive the Eucharist when you attend Mass.

Rev. John Malloy, SDB
San Francisco, CA

Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion

General Principles

by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

1. Presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion should be a conscious decision, based on a reasoned judgment regarding one’s worthiness to do so, according to the Church’s objective criteria, asking such questions as: "Am I in full communion with the Catholic Church? Am I guilty of grave sin? Have I incurred a penalty (e.g. excommunication, interdict) that forbids me to receive Holy Communion? Have I prepared myself by fasting for at least an hour?" The practice of indiscriminately presenting oneself to receive Holy Communion, merely as a consequence of being present at Mass, is an abuse that must be corrected (cf. Instruction "Redemptionis Sacramentum," nos. 81, 83).

2. The Church teaches that abortion or euthanasia is a grave sin. The Encyclical Letter Evangelium vitae, with reference to judicial decisions or civil laws that authorize or promote abortion or euthanasia, states that there is a "grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection. [...] In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to 'take part in a propaganda campaign in favour of such a law or vote for it’" (no. 73). Christians have a "grave obligation of conscience not to cooperate formally in practices which, even if permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to God’s law. Indeed, from the moral standpoint, it is never licit to cooperate formally in evil. [...] This cooperation can never be justified either by invoking respect for the freedom of others or by appealing to the fact that civil law permits it or requires it" (no. 74).

3. Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. 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.

4. Apart from an individual's judgment about his worthiness to present himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, the minister of Holy Communion may find himself in the situation where he must refuse to distribute Holy Communion to someone, such as in cases of a declared excommunication, a declared interdict, or an obstinate persistence in manifest grave sin (cf. can. 915).

5. Regarding the grave sin of abortion or euthanasia, when a person’s formal cooperation becomes manifest (understood, in the case of a Catholic politician, as his consistently campaigning and voting for permissive abortion and euthanasia laws), his Pastor should meet with him, instructing him about the Church’s teaching, informing him that he is not to present himself for Holy Communion until he brings to an end the objective situation of sin, and warning him that he will otherwise be denied the Eucharist.

6. When "these precautionary measures have not had their effect or in which they were not possible," and the person in question, with obstinate persistence, still presents himself to receive the Holy Eucharist, "the minister of Holy Communion must refuse to distribute it" (cf. Pontifical Council for Legislative Texts Declaration "Holy Communion and Divorced, Civilly Remarried Catholics" [2002], nos. 3-4). This decision, properly speaking, is not a sanction or a penalty. Nor is the minister of Holy Communion passing judgment on the person’s subjective guilt, but rather is reacting to the person’s public unworthiness to receive Holy Communion due to an objective situation of sin.

[N.B. A Catholic would be guilty of formal cooperation in evil, and so unworthy to present himself for Holy Communion, if he were to deliberately vote for a candidate precisely because of the candidate’s permissive stand on abortion and/or euthanasia. When a Catholic does not share a candidate’s stand in favour of abortion and/or euthanasia, but votes for that candidate for other reasons, it is considered remote material cooperation, which can be permitted in the presence of proportionate reasons.]

St. Paul expressed similar sentiments here:

For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, "This is my body which is for you. Do this in remembrance of me." In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes. Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. But if we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged. But when we are judged by the Lord, we are chastened so that we may not be condemned along with the world. (1 Corinthians 11:23-32)

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

Abortion

2270 Human life must be respected and protected absolutely from the moment of conception. From the first moment of his existence, a human being must be recognized as having the rights of a person - among which is the inviolable right of every innocent being to life.72

Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.73

My frame was not hidden from you, when I was being made in secret, intricately wrought in the depths of the earth.74

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:

You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish.75

God, the Lord of life, has entrusted to men the noble mission of safeguarding life, and men must carry it out in a manner worthy of themselves. Life must be protected with the utmost care from the moment of conception: abortion and infanticide are abominable crimes.76

2272 Formal cooperation in an abortion constitutes a grave offense. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. "A person who procures a completed abortion incurs excommunication latae sententiae,"77 "by the very commission of the offense,"78 and subject to the conditions provided by Canon Law.79 The Church does not thereby intend to restrict the scope of mercy. Rather, she makes clear the gravity of the crime committed, the irreparable harm done to the innocent who is put to death, as well as to the parents and the whole of society.

2273 The inalienable right to life of every innocent human individual is a constitutive element of a civil society and its legislation:

"The inalienable rights of the person must be recognized and respected by civil society and the political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being's right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death."80

"The moment a positive law deprives a category of human beings of the protection which civil legislation ought to accord them, the state is denying the equality of all before the law. When the state does not place its power at the service of the rights of each citizen, and in particular of the more vulnerable, the very foundations of a state based on law are undermined. . . . As a consequence of the respect and protection which must be ensured for the unborn child from the moment of conception, the law must provide appropriate penal sanctions for every deliberate violation of the child's rights."81

2274 Since it must be treated from conception as a person, the embryo must be defended in its integrity, cared for, and healed, as far as possible, like any other human being.

Prenatal diagnosis is morally licit, "if it respects the life and integrity of the embryo and the human fetus and is directed toward its safe guarding or healing as an individual. . . . It is gravely opposed to the moral law when this is done with the thought of possibly inducing an abortion, depending upon the results: a diagnosis must not be the equivalent of a death sentence."82

2275 "One must hold as licit procedures carried out on the human embryo which respect the life and integrity of the embryo and do not involve disproportionate risks for it, but are directed toward its healing the improvement of its condition of health, or its individual survival."83

"It is immoral to produce human embryos intended for exploitation as disposable biological material."84

"Certain attempts to influence chromosomic or genetic inheritance are not therapeutic but are aimed at producing human beings selected according to sex or other predetermined qualities. Such manipulations are contrary to the personal dignity of the human being and his integrity and identity"85 which are unique and unrepeatable.

Abortion and Canon Law:

Can. 1397 – One who commits homicide or who fraudulently or forcibly kidnaps, detains, mutilates or seriously wounds a person is to be punished with the deprivations and prohibitions mentioned in can. 1336 in accord with the seriousness of the offense; however, homicide against the persons mentioned in can. 1370 is punished by the penalties specified there.

Can. 1398 – A person who procures a successful abortion incurs an automatic (latae sententiae) excommunication.

[The Latin original reads: Can. 1398 – Qui abortum procurat, effectu secuto, in excommunicationem latae sententiae incurrit.]

An excommunication is the heaviest spiritual sanction the Church can render. So long as it is in force, it bars the excommunicated person from the church community and from receiving most of the sacraments, as well as from all public associations affiliated with the Church. An automatic (or "latae sententiae") excommunication is an especially severe penalty. The nine or so latae sententiae excommunications in the Code are reserved for use against certain things the Church particularly wants to deter, like assaulting the pope (can.1370) and priests divulging matters heard in the confessional (can.1388). Most excommunications can only follow a tribunal trial (can. 1425, §1, 2°). But latae sententiae penalties operate like a bill of attainder in that there is no "process" for their imposition – the fact that the person voluntarily performed the proscribed act, in the absence of some exception provided in the law, means the penalty is incurred. An excommunication can usually be lifted by the local bishop (the "local ordinary") and sometimes by a priest during confession (can. 1354-1357).

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, February 01, 2007 at 06:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (35) | TrackBack (1)

Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Alexandra Pelosi Examines The Friends Of God

The video above is also available here: "Friends of God" [Trailer]


The video above is also available here: Refuting Evolution (from HBO's Friends of God)

I have not seen this documentary in its entirety, but the impression I get from these clips is that Friends of God: A Road Trip With Alexandra Pelosi examines Evangelical Christians as something alien and other, and genuinely seeks to understand them, but not without encouraging a measure of condescension among viewers with different perspectives than the perspectives of Evangelical Christians.

I do think the film appears to reinforce some of the fears secular progressive people have about Evangelical Christians. The Ted Haggard footage is particularly embarrassing – especially this creepy, cringe-inducing scene where Haggard talks about the sex lives of Evangelicals and begins asking two men inappropriate questions about their own sex lives: Ted Haggard on the sex lives of Evangelicals

Too much information.

Now, on to the Pelosi clip examining Evangelicals and evolution:

I have been sorting out my own take on evolution from a Catholic perspective over the past few years, especially since reading Ann Coulter's Godless: The Church of Liberalism.

I don't have a problem, per se, with believing in evolution, so long as God is admitted to be the first cause of everything, and is understood to be intimately involved – even now – in His creation (as opposed to a deistic view of a God who set things in motion, but is no longer directly involved in the day to day existence of created beings).

Since reading Godless, I can see that there are more problems with evolutionary theory than I had realized, but I can still see the possibility that God created the universe through evolution.

I did find it interesting when Coulter explained the relationship between Darwin's theories and Marxism, Naziism, and the eugenics movement of Margaret Sanger. I hadn't connected those dots before.

This article delves into that: Coulter exposes Darwinism

Here's a quote:

As Coulter puts it, "From Marx to Hitler, the men responsible for the greatest mass murders of the twentieth century were avid Darwinists." As evidence of this, one can cite Richard Weikart's book From Darwin to Hitler, wherein the author traces the evidence that eugenics organizations in Germany at the dawn of the 20th Century touted "scientific" theories of the laws of evolution.
As Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf, "Everyone who believes in the higher evolution of living organisms must admit that every manifestation of the vital urge and struggle to live must have had a definite beginning in time and that one subject alone must have manifested it for the first time. It was then repeated again and again, and the practice of it spread over a widening area, until finally it passed into the subconscious of every member of the species, where it manifested itself as 'instinct.'"

Coulter writes, "It is impossible to understand Hitler's monstrous views apart from his belief in natural selection applied to races. He believed Darwin's theory of natural selection showed that 'science' justified extermination of the Jews."

And here, the author gets closer to home and contemporary society when she notes that many abusers, politically correct advocates, sexual profligates, racists, and "animal rights nuts" eventually gravitate to Darwinism.

Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, believed in Darwinism. In fact, she cited Darwinism to support her crusades for birth control. She was also a eugenicist. Call it pure happenstance, if you will, but Planned Parenthood is the largest provider of abortions in the U.S., and — coincidence or not — about 36% of aborted babies in this country are black. Blacks make up only 12-14% of the United States population.

Hitler's own opposition to abortion, as Weikart explains, was not based on the tenets of Judeo-Christian morality, "but rather was a complete repudiation of them." As Coulter writes, "He didn't oppose abortion because he believed in the human soul. In fact, and needless to say, he didn't oppose abortion for everyone, only 'Aryans.'"


Coulter also explained that the reason progressive people are obsessive about notions of human equality and demand universal adherence to such notions, even where there is a difficult fit or evidence to the contrary: without religious morality, there is nothing to prevent others from implementing genocidal policies akin to those of Hitler and the various communist regimes of the 20th century. I hadn't connected those dots either.

I still haven't decided what to believe with respect to evolution, but my faith isn't troubled by evolutionary theory, and my belief in the inerrancy of Sacred Scripture isn't threatened by evolutionary theory or ideas that the universe is billions of years old.

Some of my Protestant friends seem to be very threatened by these ideas, because they see them to be a stepping stone to questioning everything in Sacred Scripture, and they seem puzzled by my willingness to believe that theistic evolution, including belief in a universe that is many billions of years old, can be squared with belief in Sacred Scripture as inspired by the Holy Spirit and inerrant.

On reflection, I can see where the insecurity creeps in for Protestants. Scripture is their authority, and they view evolutionary theory and non-literal interpretations of Sacred Scripture as chipping away at that authority. They have no Magisterium. They reject most notions of Christian tradition as being a source of authority. When someone starts to tell them that there are literary elements used in Sacred Scripture that are meant to convey truths, but not meant to be understood as literally, historically accurate, they begin to wonder where it all ends. They see it as opening Pandora's box.

Catholics have the security of the Magisterium, so theistic evolution creates no authority crisis for a Catholic.

All of that being said, I was impressed by Ann Coulter's articulation of the problems with evolutionary theory, and I think that song about Job and Behemoth the sauropod kind of rocked!

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 at 06:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (21) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, January 30, 2007
Ultimate Bible Quiz: How Well Do You Know The Bible?
You know the Bible 100%!

Wow! You are awesome! You are a true Biblical scholar, not just a hearer but a personal reader! The books, the characters, the events, the verses - you know it all! You are fantastic!

Ultimate Bible Quiz
Create MySpace Quizzes

This was a fun quiz. As you can see, I got 100%, but I guessed on David's great-grandmother. You can take the quiz by clicking on the blue link titled Ultimate Bible Quiz. Thanks to The Curt Jester for posting it first.

You can copy and paste your results in your posts!

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, January 30, 2007 at 02:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (1)
New York's Cardinal Egan: Pro-Abortion Politicians Are "Friends Of Mine"


The Taking of Christ was painted in 1602 by Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (1573–1610).
Edward Cardinal Egan, Archbishop of New York City, has indicated in an NBC interview that a number of famous pro-abortion politicians are friends of his.

Here is the story: Pro-Abort Politicians "Friends of Mine" says New York Cardinal Egan

Here is the NBC interview: NEWS FORUM: Edward Cardinal Egan

You may recall that Washington Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl recently indicated that "he will take no action to prevent Nancy Pelosi from receiving Communion despite her obstinate support of abortion and same-sex marriage".

First Things' Fr. Neuhaus Criticizes Archbishop Wuerl on Pro-Abortion Politicians Fiasco

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, January 30, 2007 at 08:23 AM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, January 29, 2007
Pray For Fr. Robert F. Drinan, S.J.
Fr. Robert F. Drinan, S.J., who was the Democratic party's Representative for the 3rd Congressional District of Massachusetts from 1971 until 1981, and whose last major public appearance was as the celebrant of a Jan. 3 Mass at Trinity College in Washington, D.C., honoring pro-abortion congresswoman Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco, has died. He was 86.

Here's the story: The death of Father Drinan

As a congressman, Drinan consistently supported “abortion rights.” Even after he left office, he continued his public advocacy of abortion. In 1996, for example, Drinan spoke in favor of President Bill Clinton’s veto of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban.

The Cafeteria Is Closed has even more details about Fr. Drinan's support of so-called "abortion rights": Fr. Robert Drinan, SJ, dead at 86

MSNBC paints a rosy portrait of Fr. Drinan here: Pioneering Rev. Robert Drinan dies at 86

Pray for him. He needs it.

O my Jesus, forgive us our sins, save us from the fires of hell; lead all souls to Heaven, especially those in most need of Thy Mercy. Amen.

Libera me, Domine, de morte aeterna, in die illa tremenda, quando coeli movendi sunt et terra. Dum veneris judicare saeculum per ignem. Tremens factus sum ego et timeo, dum discussio venerit atque ventura ira. Dies irae, dies illa, calamitatis et miseriæ, dies magna et amara valde. Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine: et lux perpetua luceat eis.

("Free me, Lord, from eternal death upon that terrible day when heaven and earth shall be moved, when thou comest to judge the world with fire. I am afraid and trembling, on account of the coming judgment and wrath. That day is a day of wrath, of disaster and misery, a great and very bitter day. Grant them eternal rest, O Lord, and may everlasting light shine upon them.")

Requiem æternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis.

(Eternal rest grant unto them, O Lord, and let perpetual light shine upon them.)

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, January 29, 2007 at 09:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (63) | TrackBack (1)
Moscow Mayor Calls Gay Pride Parade "Satanic"
According to MOSNEWS.com, Moscow's mayor referred to gay pride parades as "satanic".

Given the previous post about the KGB's efforts to discredit the Holy See, this story shows an interesting shift in Russia.

Here's the story: Moscow Mayor Calls Gay Pride Parade Satanic

Here's a quote:

Moscow Mayor Yury Luzhkov said Monday he would never allow a gay parade to take place in Moscow despite pressure from the West, Russia’s RIA-Novosti news agency reports.
“Last year, Moscow came under unprecedented pressure to sanction the gay parade, which can be described in no other way than as Satanic,” Luzhkov said at the 15th Christmas educational readings in the Kremlin Palace.

“We did not let the parade take place then, and we are not going to allow it in the future,” said Luzhkov who has been in office since 1992.

The conservative 70-year-old mayor of the Russian capital also banned Portuguese bullfights in Moscow in 2001 for their violence and did not let the St. Petersburg-based rock group Leningrad perform in the city because of their explicit lyrics.

Luzhkov thanked the attending head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexy II, for his support at a time when, he said, the West is exerting considerable pressure on Moscow authorities and trying to promote gay relationships under the cover of creativity and freedom of expression.

“Religious thinkers throughout the world have said that the West has reached a crisis of faith. Some European nations bless single-sex marriages and introduce sexual guides in schools,” Luzhkov said. “Such things are a deadly moral poison for children.”


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, January 29, 2007 at 09:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)
The KGB's Assault On The Holy See
The Myth of Hitler's Pope is just one of many ways in which the KGB sought to discredit the Holy See, according to a new and excellent article from the National Review Online. The article has far-reaching implications, and actually connects a lot of dots.

Here is the article: Moscow’s Assault on the Vatican

Here is the opening section of the article:

The Soviet Union was never comfortable living in the same world with the Vatican. The most recent disclosures document that the Kremlin was prepared to go to any lengths to counter the Catholic Church’s strong anti-Communism.
In March 2006 an Italian parliamentary commission concluded “beyond any reasonable doubt that the leaders of the Soviet Union took the initiative to eliminate the pope Karol Wojtyla,” in retaliation for his support to the dissident Solidarity movement in Poland. In January 2007, when documents disclosed that the newly appointed archbishop of Warsaw, Stanislaw Wielgus, had collaborated with Poland’s Communist-era political police, he admitted the accusation and resigned. The following day the rector of Krakow’s Wawel Cathedral, the burial site of Polish kings and queens, resigned for the same reason. Then it was learned that Michal Jagosz, a member of the Vatican’s tribunal considering sainthood for the late Pope John Paul II, has been accused of being a former Communist secret police agent; according to the Polish media, he had been recruited in 1984 before leaving Poland for an assignment to the Vatican. Currently, a book is about to be published that will identify 39 other priests whose names have been found in Krakow secret police files, some of whom are now bishops. Moreover, this seems to be just scratching the surface. A special commission will soon start investigating the past of all religious servants during the Communist era, as thousands more Catholic priests throughout that country are believed to have collaborated with the secret police. And this is just Poland — the archives of the KGB and those of the political police in the rest of the former Soviet bloc have yet to be opened on the subject of operations against the Vatican.


Catholic News Agency has this article on the same topic: KGB intent on linking Pius XII with Nazis, says former spy

Please take the time to read this article and share your thoughts and insights.

You may also be interested in this article: How Pius XII Protected Jews

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, January 29, 2007 at 08:29 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, January 27, 2007
Universal Indult News From Vatican Radio


Catholic Church Conservation blog has a post which translates a conversation on Vatican Radio about the impending motu proprio on the Tridentine Rite.

You can read the translation here: Indult for Latin Mass

Rorate Caeli discusses the issue here: For the record: "Motu Proprio" News in Radio Vaticana

Angel Queen discusses it here: Indult for Latin Mass- Radio Vatican Commentary

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, January 27, 2007 at 09:24 PM | Permalink | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0)
A New Cartoon By Andrzej: Bishop Tod Brown Debates Allowing The Tridentine Mass (Again) At St. Mary's By The Sea


Here's a larger version of the cartoon: Tridentine Temptation

The cartoon was inspired by Bishop Brown's decision to add another indult Mass in the Diocese of Orange. Roman Catholic Blog covered the story here: Indult or Insult?

Andrzej has done many excellent cartoons that have been featured for some time on Roman Catholic Blog (and other blogs, as well).

Remember: Now there is a MySpace page with a collection of Andrzej cartoons.

Here's the main page: Andrzej Cartoon Site

Here's the page with all the cartoons: Cartoons

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, January 27, 2007 at 04:35 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, January 26, 2007
Divine Inspiration?

The video above is also available here: Akiane Kramarik - Spiritual Young Artist

Thanks to Jimmy Akin for the original post: Amazing

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, January 26, 2007 at 09:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, January 25, 2007
Barbara Kralis: A Plea To The Pope For Help
This excellent article by Barbara Kralis is well worth reading: A plea to the Pope for help

Please share your thoughts on the article.

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, January 25, 2007 at 10:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)
Indult or Insult?
Bishop Tod Brown has "generously" decided that he is going to allow another indult Mass of the Tridentine rite in Orange County. All Catholics who are interested in attending the new additional indult Tridentine Mass in Orange County have to do is drive to Yorba Linda at 7:00 AM on Sundays!

The only other indult Mass in Orange County is offered at 8:00 AM in the tiny Serra Chapel at the Mission San Juan Capistrano. The Tridentine Mass at that location is only offered at 8:00 A.M. on Sundays and non-transferred Holy Days, is attended by 300+ persons every Sunday, and 450+ on the first Sunday of every month. The Serra Chapel is designed to hold approximately 120 persons. Many of these people drive from as far as 50 miles away and those who plan to attend are encouraged to plan on arriving up to 45 minutes early if they hope to get a seat!

The diocesan announcement appears to indicate that this new permission for an additional indult Mass from Bishop Brown was not motivated by the conditions at the Serra Chapel, but rather by a certain impending motu proprio.

Here is the announcement from the Diocese of Orange in PDF format: Yorba Linda indult

Here is the text of the announcement made by the Diocese of Orange:

An Additional Mass in Latin to be Celebrated Bishop Brown oversees all aspects of the liturgical life of our local Church. This includes the implementation of Ecclesia Dei, a 1988 apostolic letter by Pope John Paul II in which he recognized the "rightful aspirations" of all Catholics who wished to worship according to traditional forms and called upon bishops to apply both widely and generously the indult, Quattor abhinc annos, issued by the Congregation for Divine Worship on October 3, 1984. A similar moto proprio is expected soon from Pope Benedict XVI.

Bishop Brown has listened to the concerns of those faithful of our local Church who are attached to the older liturgical form of the Mass, i.e., the Missal of 1962, often referred to as the “Tridentine Mass.” Although one such Mass is currently celebrated each Sunday morning at 8:00 AM at the historic Serra Chapel of Mission San Juan Capistrano, the level of interest is such that Bishop Brown has directed that an additional Mass utilizing the Missale Romanum – editio typica 1962 (Latin Mass) will be celebrated “ad experimentum” at the John Paul II Polish Center, located at 3999 Rose Drive in Yorba Linda, on Sundays at 7:00 AM. The first Mass at that location will be celebrated on the 25th of February 2007, the First Sunday of Lent.

Bishop Brown made his decision after consultation with his College of Consultors and with the agreement of Fr. George Blais, the director of the Center, and the willingness of the Rt. Reverend Eugene Hayes O. Praem., Abbot of St. Michael’s Abbey, to supply priests able to celebrate these Masses fittingly. It is hoped that this additional location, one that can accommodate a larger number of the faithful, will be of pastoral benefit to those who are attached to this older form of the Mass.

It is the role of the Diocesan Bishop to be at the service of communio within the Church that he is called to shepherd. May this broader and more generous application of the norms articulated in Ecclesia Dei be a sign of this solicitude for all God’s Holy People in the Diocese of Orange.

This is official conformation from the Diocese of Orange that a motu proprio [the phrase is misspelled in the diocesan announcement] is expected from Pope Benedict XVI on the Tridentine Mass.

It is interesting that Bishop Brown is reacting to the impending motu proprio in this way – now – when the impending motu proprio is rumored to free up the Tridentine liturgy in a manner that is much more generous than the freedom that has heretofore been granted by Bishop Brown in the Diocese of Orange, and is reportedly more generous than Bishop Brown has even now been moved to become.

Perhaps Bishop Brown sensed that Pope Benedict's upcoming motu proprio would have made him appear out of step with the mind of the Church and felt this would give the appearance that he is as solicitous of assisting those who wish to worship at the Old Rite as Pope Benedict XVI.

"I am of the opinion that the old rite should be granted much more generously to all those who desire it. It is impossible to see what could be dangerous or unacceptable about that. A community is calling its very being into question when it declares that what was its holiest and highest possession is strictly forbidden and when it makes the longing for it seem downright indecent." — Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Salt Of The Earth, Ignatius Press, 1997

It seems a bit nervy that this permission being offered by Bishop Brown for an additional indult Mass is being billed as a pastoral solution and a "broader and more generous application" of Ecclesia Dei.

When the Traditional Latin Mass of the old rite was being offered at 12:00 PM at St. Mary's by the Sea in Huntington Beach, the church was literally packed to capacity. The Tridentine Masses at Mission San Juan Capistrano are also reportedly packed with hundreds of people. Moreover, Our Lady Help Of Christians Chapel, an independent Catholic chapel in Garden Grove, has Sunday Masses at 8:00 AM, 10:00 AM, and 12:30 PM – all of which are filled with the over 800 Catholic families who attend the Tridentine Mass at that location. (Note: Masses at Our Lady Help of Christians Chapel are not sanctioned by Bishop Brown.) Many of the familes who now attend at Our Lady Help of Christians had been attending the 12:00 PM Mass at St. Mary's by the Sea until Bishop Brown cancelled that Mass when Fr. Daniel Johnson retired.

Now, without endorsing independent chapels, the robust number of Catholics who worship at Our Lady Help of Christians – in addition to the hundreds of people who worship at the Mission San Juan Capistrano – is a strong indication of a tremendous desire for the Old Mass in Orange County.

It seems to me that sanctioning Masses at 7:00 AM and 8:00 AM in Yorba Linda and San Juan Capistrano in a diocese as big as Orange (which means a long drive for most of the diocese at an early morning hour) isn't all that generous or considerate. It seems a bit insulting to families interested in worshiping at the Tridentine Mass to think anybody wants to make a long drive at that early hour, much less familes with small children (or teenagers).

All of that being said, it is still better than nothing.

Let's all pray for the day when Traditional Catholics no longer have to settle for a little better than nothing from their shepherds.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, January 25, 2007 at 06:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (35) | TrackBack (1)

Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Tom Cruise: The Christ of Scientology?
Tom Cruise has reportedly been told that he is the "Christ" of Scientology.

Here's the story: Cruise: The Christ of Scientology?

This story is so bizarre that I suspect it must have been either taken out of context, or it's a fabrication.

I can't find the story in anything other than tabloids and entertainment related news sites.

If it's true, then I am confused as to how Scientology believes it ill ever convert lots of people to such a bizarre belief system.

If you are not familiar with what Scientologists actually believe, here is a simplified, but essentially accurate, explanation of Scientology in pictures: What is Scientology?

Update: For a more serious exposition of the history of the Church of Scientology, I recommend the following:

Los Angeles Times: The Scientology Story: Six-Part Series

The Secrets of Scientology

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, January 24, 2007 at 11:39 AM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, January 23, 2007
The Marks Of The Church


The Church Christ founded has four marks by which it may be known: it is one; it is holy; it is Catholic (universal); is is apostolic.

There is only one universal Christian Church, united in faith, in worship and in in succession from the Apostles themselves: the Catholic Church.

The Fifteen Features of the True Church
(taken from the Modern Catholic Dictionary by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.)

The fifteen features of the true Church developed by St. Robert Bellarmine (1542 – 1621), cardinal, Archbishop of Capua, and Doctor of the Church. As a contemporary of the original Protestant Reformers, he expanded the traditional four marks to fifteen, as follows:

1) Name – The Church’s name, Catholic, universal, and worldwide, and not confined to any particular nation or people.
2) Antiquity – In tracing the Church’s ancestry directly to Jesus Christ.

3) Duration – Constant duration in lasting substantially unchanged for so many centuries.

4) Extensiveness – In the number of the Church’s loyal members.

5) Episcopal Succession – The episcopal succession of the Church’s bishops from the first Apostles at the Last Supper to the present hierarchy.

6) Doctrinal Agreement – The doctrinal agreement of the Church’s doctrine with the teaching of the ancient Church.

7) Union – The union of the Church’s members among themselves and with their visible head the Roman Pontiff.

8) Holiness – Holiness of doctrine in reflecting the sanctity of God.

9) Efficacy – Efficacy of doctrine in its power to sanctify believers and inspire them to great moral achievement.

10) Holiness Of Life – The holiness of life of the Church’s representative writers and defenders.

11) Miracles – The glory of miracles worked in the Church and under the Church’s auspices.

12) Prophecy – The gift of prophecy found among the Church’s saints and spokespeople.

13) Opposition – The opposition that the Church arouses among those who attack her on the very grounds that Christ was opposed by His enemies.

14) Unhappy End – The unhappy end of those who fight against the Church.

15) Temporal Peace And Earthly Happiness – The temporal peace and earthly happiness of those who live by the Church’s teaching and defend her interests.


Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, January 23, 2007 at 11:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, January 22, 2007
Seven Disguises In Which God Frequently Sends His Graces


Seven Disguises In Which God Frequently Sends His Graces
In the disguise of ingratitude from friends.
In the disguise of being misunderstood.
In the disguise of failure.
In the disguise of being dishonored.
In the disguise of sickness.
In the disguise of poverty.
In the disguise of our daily work.


Our Lord isn’t anxious for us to suffer so let’s not complain to Him any more than is necessary! He sees us in our misery and looks forward to our final victory. If we could only appreciate the great work He’s doing in preparing these crosses for us. - St. Thérèse of Lisieux
"The suffering endured for God are the greatest proof of our love for Him" - Saint Alphonsus Ligouri


Posted by Thomistic on Monday, January 22, 2007 at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, January 20, 2007
Hillary Clinton: "I'm In, And I'm In To Win"
Hillary Clinton has announced her interest in running for President of the United States in the 2008 election. Although the announcement isn't exactly a surprise, it is a reason for concern. It demonstrates that the Clintons feel that the embarrassment that was Bill Clinton's presidency, the fact that he evidently committed high crimes and misdemeanors during his presidency, was impeached and disbarred, and lied, repeatedly, to the American people, will not impede Ms. Clinton's bid for the White House.

Hillary made her announcement on her website (there's video): hillaryclinton.com

She talks about fighting for "women's basic rights" in her video. Translation: fighting for abortion rights.

Throughout her public life, Ms. Clinton has made it clear that she supports Roe vs. Wade, which essentially gives women the right to legal, elective abortion, on demand up until the live birth of the unborn baby. Roe vs. Wade has given rise to the legal procedure known as partial birth abortion, a gruesome procedure that involves the following:

An abortion in which the person performing the abortion, deliberately and intentionally vaginally delivers a living fetus until, in the case of a head-first presentation, the entire fetal head is outside the body of the mother, or, in the case of breech presentation, any part of the fetal trunk past the navel is outside the body of the mother, for the purpose of performing an overt act that the person knows will kill the partially delivered living fetus; and performs the overt act, other than completion of delivery, that kills the partially delivered living fetus.
Wikipedia's article on partial birth abortion includes the following information:

Since 1995, led by Congressional Republicans, the United States House of Representatives and U.S. Senate have moved several times to pass measures banning the procedure. Congress passed two such measures by wide margins during Bill Clinton's presidency, but Clinton vetoed those bills in April 1996 and October 1997 on the grounds that they did not include health exceptions. Subsequent Congressional attempts at overriding the veto were unsuccessful.
A major part of the legal battle over banning the procedure relates to health exceptions, which would permit the procedure in special circumstances. The 1973 Supreme Court decision Roe v. Wade, which declared many state-level abortion restrictions unconstitutional, allowed states to impose certain restrictions on second- and third-trimester abortions. The companion ruling, Doe v. Bolton, required that states' restrictions on abortions must provide an exception for the health of the woman, and defined health to include mental as well as physical health, though in his concurring opinion Chief Justice Burger wrote, "plainly, the Court today rejects any claim that the Constitution requires abortions on demand". In practice, the Supreme Court has found most attempts to legislate restrictions on abortion to be in violation of Roe v. Wade.

In 2003, however, opponents of the procedure succeeded in getting the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act (HR 760, S 3) signed into law; the House passed it on October 2 with a vote of 281-142, the Senate passed it on October 21 with a vote of 64-34, and President George W. Bush signed it into law on November 5.


For more information on partial birth abortion click here: Key Facts on Partial-Birth Abortion

If a politician running for public office on any level announced that they supported solving the problem of world hunger and world poverty by euthanizing the poor and then using their bodies to manufacture food (as in the movie Soylent Green), most people would not consider such a candidate fit for public office. Such a candidate would likely be seen as morally bankrupt, if not literally insane, no matter how wonderful their ideas were on issues unrelated to world hunger and world poverty.

Yet people, even Catholics, continue to support (and even celebrate) political candidates like Bill and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Al Gore, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, John Edwards, Nancy Pelosi, Loretta Sanchez, Arnold Schwarzenegger, and Rudy Giuliani, all of whom support legal, elective abortion.

It's really quite baffling, and yet it is a testament to how desensitized people have become to the abortion holocaust. According to the national Right To Life, legal, elective abortion has claimed the lives of 47,282,923 babies since 1973, in the United States alone. See here for details: Abortion in the United States: Statistics and Trends

Candidates who support legal, elective abortion are not fit for office, no matter how wonderful their ideas about other issues may seem to prospective voters.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, January 20, 2007 at 02:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (17) | TrackBack (0)
Psychic Told The Family That Shawn Hornbeck Was Dead


The video above can also be viewed here: Sylvia Brown Told Kidnapped Child's Parents He was Dead

Sylvia Browne, who often appears on Montel Williams' show, told Shawn Hornbeck's family that he was dead and reportedly offered to continue helping the family for $700 per half hour.

Here's the story: She told them boy was dead

Below is a video with more from Sylvia:



The video above can also be viewed here: Sylvia Brown

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, January 20, 2007 at 10:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, January 18, 2007
The Truth About Muhammad

The video above can also be viewed here: The Truth About Muhammad

In the video above, Robert Spencer discusses his book, The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion, in the clip above.

Although the book cites texts considered authoritative in the Islamic world, the book has been banned in Pakistan because Mr. Spencer is not a Muslim. He is a Melkite Greek Catholic. Melkite Greek Catholics are an Eastern church very similar to the orthodox churches but in communion with Rome, mostly concentrated in Lebanon and Syria, also in Jordan and the Palestinian territories. (I lifted the lines about Mr. Spencer's religious background and the details about the Melkite Greek Church from a transcript of a C-SPAN interview with Robert Spencer done on August 20, 2006.)

Here is the transcript of the C-SPAN interview with Robert Spencer, which goes into detail about his background and his scholarship with respect to Islam: Robert Spencer: Jihad Watch, Director

Here is some more information on the history of Islam:

Mohammed and Mohammedanism

The Great and Enduring Heresy of Mohammed by Hilaire Belloc (This is truly excellent. It is well written and informative.)

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, January 18, 2007 at 07:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, January 17, 2007
Traditionalist Catholics & Antisemitism
The Southern Poverty Law Center has put out an "intelligence report" suggesting that Traditionalist Catholics are often antisemitic. The article mentions Mel Gibson as an example, but goes on to make generalizations about Traditionalist Catholics that are not flattering. The overall tone of the article is that Traditionalist Catholics are a growing threat and people should sit up and take notice.

Here is the article: The 'Synagogue of Satan'

One of the most interesting things the article mentions is the idea that the Antichrist will be Jewish.

The Greek and Latin Fathers of the Church were of the opinion that a personal Antichrist will come just before the end of the world and be accepted by the Jews as the Messiah and enthroned in the temple at Jerusalem.

One of the reasons the Church Fathers believed this is this verse from the Gospel of St. John:

I have come in my Father's name, and you do not receive me; if another comes in his own name, him you will receive. (John 5:43)
An excellent exposition of the Church's understanding of the Antichrist can be found in the Catholic Encyclopedia: Antichrist

Catholic Answers provides these articles about the Antichrist:

The Antichrist by Jimmy Akin
The Antichrist (Church Fathers)
The Antichrist (Fathers Know Best)

Antisemitism is sinful, and it cannot be condoned, and there do appear to be elements within Traditionalist Catholic circles whose statements about the Jewish people in general are, at best, politically incorrect (and perhaps imprudent), and at worst, antisemitic.

It seems to me that the best way to view anyone not of the Catholic faith is as a potential Catholic. The last thing you want to do when explaining the Catholic Faith to people is to antagonize them.

I would never encourage altering the Catholic Faith so as to make it appealing to anyone. We should never give people the false impression that one can be a good Catholic, but differ from Church teaching on matters of faith and morals – and a lot of people do need to hear what the Church teaches (and why) when it comes to faith and morals – especially in terms of sexual morality or the gospel of life. However, at the same time, I would say that Catholics should definitely make an effort to use prudence when presenting elements of the faith that are controversial or could be easily misunderstood. Jesus did not reveal his Divine Nature to the Apostles and lay out the doctrine of the Holy Trinity all at one time and in the early stages of His ministry to them. He revealed Himself and the Three Persons of the Blessed Trinity gradually.

I can't tell you how many times I have cringed inside when hearing a Catholic "explain" Catholic teaching on any number of issues and inadvertently mangle the authentic teaching or illustrate the teaching in a way that is actually heretical. Evidently, lots of Catholics think that Sunday Mass attendance or what they understand to be a general knowledge of the Faith makes them qualified to teach the Faith. This often amounts to what they have imbibed over their years as a Catholic, and/or is dependent upon the competency with which their own catechetical instruction was carried out – and as many people know – Catholic catechesis in the United States has generally been abysmal over the last 40 years or so.

Any well catechized Catholic who has ever sought to teach the Catholic Faith, especially in an academic setting, where grades are involved, can tell you that there is often a sense among the students that catechism is a waste of time, that "we already know this stuff" (and they really, really don't), and my personal favorite (heard from parents and students): you can't give a grade in religion class, because there are no right or wrong answers (cringe) or because you can't grade someone's relationship with God (a depressingly silly perspective rooted in the error that religion is entirely subjective). Lots of people who are not qualified to teach the Catholic Faith believe they are qualified and attempt to do so, and lots of people who believe they already understand the Catholic Faith (but don't) are frequently their pupils.

I can't tell you how many times people have tried to explain the Catholic Faith to me (especially in relation to the Second Vatican Council) who completely misunderstood Church teaching.

Explanations of the Catholic doctrine of The Blessed Trinity, the Hypostatic Union, the Immaculate Conception, and other teachings about The Blessed Virgin Mary, as well as about Catholic teaching on moral issues can easily become mired in error if not given by someone with a solid grasp of Catholic doctrine. Subjects like the Catholic doctrine that there is no salvation outside the Church, or of predestination can lead to confusion and hinder people from embracing Catholic teaching if they are not explained properly.

I would put Catholic teaching about the Antichrist in a similar category. Although I am personally fascinated by it and have read a few books on the subject, it seems to me that one isn't likely to convert many Jewish people to the Catholic faith by saying terrible things about Jews and then launching into a dissertation on how the Jews are destined to follow the Antichrist.

Part of the problem comes from lumping all the Jews into one category. That isn't any more accurate than lumping all Catholics into one category, and the potential for confusion and error snowballs from there.

Bottom line: Just as it is unjust to portray all Traditional Catholics as dangerous antisemites, it is equally unjust to make sweeping generalizations about the Jewish people either.

The other important lesson is that when explaining the Catholic Faith, make sure you know the subject matter you are discussing. If you aren't sure about something, don't give your best guess as a definitive answer. Tell the person you don't know the answer, then look it up and get back to them. All of us have a moral obligation to know our Catholic Faith and be able to give a reason for the hope that is in us, and we must always take great care never to misrepresent Church teaching when explaining the Catholic Faith to others.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, January 17, 2007 at 09:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (74) | TrackBack (1)

Tuesday, January 16, 2007
Andrzej Cartoon Site


Andrzej has done many excellent cartoons that have been featured for some time on Roman Catholic Blog (and other blogs, as well). Now there is a MySpace page with a collection of Andrzej cartoons. (The one featured above is one of my favorites.)

Here's the main page: Andrzej Cartoon Site

Here's the page with all the cartoons: Cartoons

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 at 08:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, January 15, 2007
Archbishop Donald Wuerl Will Not Prevent Nancy Pelosi From Receiving Holy Communion
California Catholic Daily reports that Archbishop Donald Wuerl has indicated that he has no intention of preventing pro-abortion, and same-sex marriage advocate, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, from receiving Holy Communion, even though it is a sacrilege for her to receive so long as she obstinately maintains her opposition to the moral teachings of Christ and actively defends the right to murder the unborn as a legitimate, legal, and moral option.

Here is the story: Not his style

Here is a quote:

Archbishop Donald Wuerl of Washington, D.C., who has come under fire for failing to speak out against Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s attendance Jan. 3 at a Mass at her alma mater, Trinity University, came to San Diego’s Kona Kai Resort the weekend of January 13-14 to speak at an international Communion and Liberation conference.
While in San Diego, Wuerl told California Catholic Daily reporter Allyson Smith that he has no plans to discipline the newly elected Democratic Speaker, who is now the most powerful Catholic in Congress -- and an ardent supporter of abortion, embryonic stem cell research, and pro-homosexual legislation.


(Side note: Archbishop Wuerl looks a bit like Aaron Spelling, don't you think, or maybe a cross between Aaron Spelling and Norman Fell [Three's Company's Mr. Roper]?)

Back on topic: Archbishop Wuerl needs to read this: Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion, General Principles by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

Why not send him a copy? You can find his contact information here: Archdiocese of Washington Contact Information

There are phone numbers there, as well, so you can feel free to give him a call. Please let him know that you will support him if he decides to lovingly explain to Ms. Pelosi and other pro-abortion Catholic politicians (from both political parties) that they cannot be Catholic and pro-abortion and that so long as they support legal, elective abortion, they are not in communion with Jesus Christ, or His Church and may not receive Holy Communion until they publicly retract their support for legal, elective abortion. Sometimes human respect can be a powerful snare. The devil got Adam by using Eve. It might be that the devil sometimes gets bishops through fear of negative publicity or of alienating anyone. Perhaps the knowledge that he will be supported by the faithful if he actually teaches the Catholic Faith and demonstrates a backbone when it comes to defending the unborn a bishop (or cardinal) may find his courage and do what God expects of him.

It would seem that inaction when it comes to defending the lives of the unborn would indicate that a bishop was shamefully worthless. It would be a shame for a bishop to give the impression that he is worthless, and not the salt of the earth.

Jesus warned the apostles not to be worthless, and he told them what God thinks of worthless bishops:

"You are the salt of the earth; but if salt has lost its taste, how shall its saltness be restored? It is no longer good for anything except to be thrown out and trodden under foot by men." (Matthew 5:13)
Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, January 15, 2007 at 09:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (38) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, January 14, 2007
Dr. James Dobson Says 'No Way' To McCain Candidacy
Dr. James Dobson has indicated that, speaking personally, he would never vote for Senator John McCain if he runs for president. Citing McCain's support for homosexual unions, Dobson was quoted as saying that he hopes Republicans "don't get stuck with him" as the Republican nominee. Senator McCain's campaign reforms, which conservative Republicans have long viewed as a betrayal of the party, is another issue Republicans have held in their craw (justifiably, in my opinion) for years, and Dobson doesn't like the restrictions the reforms created.

Here's the story: Dobson says 'no way' to McCain candidacy

Here's a quote:

"Speaking as a private individual, I would not vote for John McCain under any circumstances," said James Dobson, founder of the Colorado Springs-based Focus on the Family as well as the Focus Action cultural action organization set up specifically to provide a platform for informing and rallying constituents.
Dobson, who always is careful to note that he's not speaking for the non-profit ministry, which cannot advocate for or against candidates legally, also doesn't hesitate to state his personal opinions on social or political issues and agendas.


Here's a bit more:

His most recent comments came during an interview on the Jerry Johnson Live program on KCBI 90.0 FM.
The show host noted that pro-family conservatives already are thinking about the next cycle of leadership in the United States, which will be determined in the 2008 presidential and congressional elections. He also noted that McCain and New York mayor Rudy Guiliani appear to be the leaders.

Then he asked Dobson to listen to a statement from McCain and respond.

"I think, uh … I think that gay marriage should be allowed if there's a ceremony kind of thing, if you wanna call it that … I don't have any problem with that," McCain says.

"Dr. Dobson, would you be comfortable with someone like John McCain as the … conservative or Republican candidate for president?" Johnson asked.

"Well, let me say that I am not in the office. I'm in the little condo so I can speak for myself and not for Focus on the Family," Dobson said in rejecting McCain's leadership.


On the campaign "reforms":

He noted that legislation he'd just been discussing on the program, regarding an attempt by Democrat leaders in Congress to create obstacles for ministries such as Focus to reach constituents with action messages about pending legislation, is being supported by McCain, too.
"That came from McCain, and the McCain Feingold Bill kept us from telling the truth right before elections … and there are a lot of other things. He's not in favor of traditional marriage, and I pray that we won't get stuck with him," Dobson said.

The provisions of the new congressional proposal, hidden deep inside a plan to reform lobbying rules to eliminate the many recent scandals involving members of Congress, would require pro-family groups to provide documentation of their actions to the government any time they try to spark any "grass-roots" action.

Phone calls, personal visits, e-mails, magazines, broadcasts, phone banks, appearances, travel, fundraising and other items all would be subject to government tabulation, verification and audits, Dobson said during a recent program. "On and on it goes."

"Clearly, the objective here is to hide what goes on from the public and punish and silence those of us who would talk about what our representatives are doing," Dobson said.


Well, this is an interesting development, because Dr. Dobson has a lot of clout with a good deal of the Republican base - a base that no Republican candidate can ignore and get successfully elected. Which leads me to wonder why so many candidates who are pro-homosexual and/or pro-abortion, or who have publicly waffled on both issues in a way that appears to indicate their public positions are political posturing, continue to fantasize that they will appeal to the Republican base. In my opinion, some welcome this type of division, because they want to split the Republican party and neutralize the effectiveness of consciences informed by religious values in forming public policy.

Waffling on abortion and/or homosexual unions, or actively supporting both, causes discerning voters to question a candidate's credibility (or suitability for elected office, if they are in favor of protecting abortion or sodomy through force of law). It also calls into question the ability of such a candidate to find and appoint Supreme Court justices who don't think murdering unborn babies and sodomy are civil rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

Why must it be that only mediocre men with dubious agendas and doubtful loyalty to traditional morality are supposedly the most electable candidates we must all support and rally behind? Why are people with good records written off in favor of people whose records are spotty? Beating the Democrats isn't the objective. Promoting a moral society that protects genuine rights and secures the right to life for the weakest among us is the objective. If people must hold their noses, why can't pro-life Catholic Democrats who recognize that sodomy is not a civil right hold their noses and vote against their party? If they did and we put up a solid candidate, the better candidate should win. If I am to believe that pro-life Democrats hold their noses every time they vote for the abortion on demand candidates their abortion on demand platform Democratic political party offers them (but still vote for said candidates) what can be done to change that? Why do they think other issues trump the right to life for the unborn (which is the most fundamental human right, without which, all other rights are unnecessary)? Why not change the hearts and minds of Catholic who keep voting for baby killers instead of working to convince Catholics that another Caspar Milquetoast is the only viable option?

There are enough Catholics in this country and the U.S. Congress that if we all spoke with one voice on these issues we could end the injustice of abortion and stop wasting time inventing ways to protect acts of sodomy by force of law and get to other important issues. It is a scandal that Catholics in America have been so ineffective in ending the abortion holocaust. I would hate to be many, if not most, of the United States bishops on Judgment Day!

I want Catholics to either vote their Catholic Faith or stop pretending they possess it!

And before I hear anyone use the Iraq war as their excuse, I will remind you that the war hasn't been going on since 1973, when Roe vs. Wade became the law of the land. Catholics can differ (even with the Pope) on whether a war is just. They cannot differ on whether or not elective abortion should be legal. Pope Benedict XVI said as much, here: Worthiness to Receive Holy Communion, General Principles by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, January 14, 2007 at 03:06 PM | Permalink | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, January 11, 2007
Mitt Romney On Abortion, "Gay" Rights & Other Issues: How Much Can He Have Changed?

This video can also be seen here: The Real Romney?

Mitt Romney lost me at Mormonism, but if that isn't enough to convince people that he shouldn't be the Republican candidate, this video might.

The video also captures Ted Kennedy in all his cafeteria Catholic glory. At his particular judgment, he will have to face God knowing he, a Catholic, who should know better, stood before millions of people on camera, and repeatedly stumped for the right for women to kill their unborn babies through legal, elective abortion. He ought to fear God's judgment over that issue even more than he should fear God's judgment on his role in what happened to Mary Jo Kopechne at Chappaquiddick.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, January 11, 2007 at 06:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (21) | TrackBack (1)

Wednesday, January 10, 2007
New Video: More Liturgical Abuses In The Diocese Of Orange

You can also see the above video here: Included: Teen from the band gives Homily at Catholic Mass

This video of several Masses on different occasions includes Bishop Tod Brown altering the words of the Mass, a lay youth minister giving a reflection as part of the homily, a strange reflection on beauty by a visiting priest, parishioners entering the sanctuary around the altar during the Liturgy of the Eucharist (and remaining in a standing position throughout the consecration), the routine alteration of the words of the Agnus Dei through song, Bishop Brown in the sanctuary with a costumed person in native garb, and Bishop Brown consecrating the elements of the Holy Eucharist in woven baskets and glass pitchers.

Remember that this is the same Bishop Tod Brown who was quite particular about demanding that one parish within his diocese - St. Mary's by the Sea - follow his own new liturgical norm and remain standing during the Agnus Dei, even allowing the parish administrator to send letters inviting Catholics who continued to kneel to leave the parish and the Diocese of Orange, tell those who continued to kneel that doing so was a mortal sin, and dismiss them from all parish volunteer positions and parish organizations with which they were affiliated.

This is also the same diocese that brought you the videos linked below:

The Halloween Mass including the Mass with an extraordinary minister of the Holy Eucharist dressed as a devil, as well as The Barney Blessing.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, January 10, 2007 at 06:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (45) | TrackBack (1)

Tuesday, January 09, 2007
An Inspirational Video: Streets of NYC

You can also see the video above here: Streets of NYC

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, January 09, 2007 at 10:32 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, January 08, 2007
More On Cardinal Mahony & The Rainbow Fish
Barbara Kralis has written an excellent article on the Rainbow Fish pin endorsed by Roger Cardinal Mahony's 'Ministry with Lesbian and Gay Catholics' [MLGC].

Here is the article: Cd. Mahony's fishy fish lure

It is quite good, and well worth the read.

Please share your thoughts after reading it.


Posted by Thomistic on Monday, January 08, 2007 at 10:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)
The Mass

You can also watch the above video here: The Mass

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, January 08, 2007 at 08:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, January 04, 2007
The Summa Is Back In Print


Shawn Tribe at The New Liturgical Movement reports: Further signs of the times? The Summa back in print.

A portion of the publisher's reason is cited by TNLM:


"This paperback reissue of the classic Latin/English edition first published by the English Dominicans in the 1960s and 1970s... has been undertaken in response to regular requests from readers and librarians around the world for the entire series of 61 volumes to be made available again."

My copy is the five volume English version: St. Thomas Aquinas Summa Theologica (translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province) (5 Volume Set) (Hardcover)

You can also read the Summa online here: Summa Theologica

Any thoughts?


Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, January 04, 2007 at 10:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
US Catholics Can Look Forward To As Many As 25 Bishops Retiring This Year
Twenty bishops, but not Bishop Tod Brown, and five cardinals, but not Cardinal Roger Mahony, will be 75 or older in 2007, and will therefore must submit their resignation to Pope Benedict XVI.

Catholic News Service reports:

There are 14 still-active U.S. bishops, including three cardinals, who have already turned 75. Eleven more, including two cardinals, will celebrate their 75th birthday in 2007.

It's an interesting prospect that will likely produce many changes within the church over the next ten years. It would be nice to know who will be tapped to replace any retiring bishops. So far, Benedict XVI's appointments have been a mixed bag.

Here's the story: Up to 25 U.S. bishops could retire for age reasons in 2007

Remember, though, that the Holy Father is not required to accept their resignations.

As the article notes:

Pope John Paul II often asked cardinals to stay on the job after they reached the age of 75. So far Pope Benedict XVI has given no indication that he will change that practice. Even when a cardinal retires in his 70s, he remains an active member of the College of Cardinals, eligible to enter a conclave and vote for a new pope, until age 80.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, January 04, 2007 at 09:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, January 03, 2007
Update: More On The Archdiocese of Los Angeles' Ministry With Lesbian & Gay Catholics
Diogenes has more on the history of the Archdiocese of L.A. Ministry with Lesbian and Gay Catholics: Corrupt

The additional information Diogenes shares is eye-opening, to say the least. The Curt Jester is right to title his post: Foxes, enjoy the henhouse

Thanks to the Curt Jester and Gerald at The Cafeteria is Closed and Diogenes for bringing the story to a wider audience.


Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, January 03, 2007 at 11:10 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)
Vent with Michelle Malkin: All The Abortion Lies Fit To Print

The video above can also be viewed here: Michelle Malkin: All The Abortion Lies Fit To Print

You can also read about the story here: All the abortion lies fit to print


This is really not not surprising.

Roe vs. Wade was based on a lie too: The Real Jane Roe

"Roe" has even sought to have the decision overturned: 'Roe' will file appeal with Supreme Court

The so-called "pro-choice" propaganda used to pave the way to getting people to accept Roe vs. Wade was also based in lies: Innocent blood: How lying marketers sold Roe v. Wade to America

Shifting the focus from the reality of what abortion is to whether or not people should have "freedom of choice" in a free society was a clever diversion tactic on the part of abortion advocates, but that's all it is – a diversion tactic.

Life is filled with choices, but life's choices are not always between things of equal value.

Deciding between chocolate, vanilla or strawberry ice cream is a harmless personal choice – elective abortion is not.

Every action we make, whether choosing to eat ice cream or go on a tri-state killing spree involves a choice. Some choices are morally good, some are morally neutral, and some are intrinsically evil. So talking about "choice" isn't really helpful. Choice is just a euphemism meant to distract people from what abortion really involves. Nobody should have the right legally to make the "choice" of abortion any more than they should legally be allowed to make the choice to go on a tri-state killing spree.

The fantasy is that abortion is only a "personal choice" and that anyone who wants one should be able to choose to get one and it's nobody else's business.

The "right" to abortion is a logical absurdity anyway. One can never have the "right" to do what is intrinsically evil – especially to another person. Remember the golden rule? Here it is: Treat others as you would wish to be treated. We all have the power to abuse our free will and sin, but not the "right" to do so, and the exercise of our free will does not protect us from the consequences of our choices or change the objective moral quality of the action chosen. If I choose to go on a tri-state killing spree, my power to freely choose to do so doesn't make my choice morally acceptable. That my choice to go on a tri-state killing spree also happens to be illegal is incidental – my choice would be immoral whether the law recognized it or not. Since we are fortunate enough to live in a society that at least recognizes the immorality and injustice involved in tri-state killing sprees, the law recognizes that the freely chosen act of running through three states and bumping people off along the way is wrong, and considers such activity a crime punishable by prison or even death. Nobody (except perhaps Ted Bundy) would argue against that instance of the law making a moral judgment, but the minute someone mentions outlawing abortion, people start saying, "You can't legislate morality." They forget that lots of things that are illegal are also considered immoral (or sinful, to be more precise). Here are some examples: rape, theft, robbery, kidnapping, perjury, vandalism, prostitution, recreational drug use with controlled or illegal substances, driving while intoxicated, and the list goes on and on. Yet when someone mentions making laws against abortion, suddenly everything becomes a fuzzy shade of gray and public perception of morality becomes difficult to define. It's almost like a large group of people have been overtaken by a hypnotic fog that obstructs their ability to reason and makes them forget what they are being asked to consider.

The reality is that abortion doesn't affect just one life, it affects many, many lives, including (most importantly) a helpless, defenseless, innocent, developing, unborn human life that will not survive the "choice" of abortion (unlike the mother making the "choice" to end her developing baby's life).

Once people realize what abortion actually is, and stop pretending it's simply a harmless "choice" (like picking an ice cream flavor) then people will see that the so-called "right" to "choose" abortion is not only a lie, but a smokescreen to distract people from paying attention to what abortion really involves.

Reading this will be most helpful in understanding what I mean: The Apple Argument Against Abortion

Elective abortion involves deliberately ending an innocent, developing human life. The circumstances as to how that human life was conceived do not alter the reality that it is an innocent, developing, human life.

Elective abortion is always wrong – and I will not say "in my opinion" just because I am supposed to pretend that viewpoints to the contrary of my own are of equal value, despite the fact that going along with such a contrary viewpoint means supporting the "choice" of deliberately killing an innocent, developing unborn baby. As one commenter on this blog once said: "We live in an age where all points of view are supposedly valid - whether there is any evidence to support them or not. To think otherwise is to be "judgemental", the worst thing you can say about anyone these days." Well, I believe that people should not allow being called judgmental to prevent them from speaking the truth. We must be prudent in how we present the truth, but we must speak the truth out of love for our neighbor. At our particular judgment, God is not going to ask us whether or not we were popular among those who opposed His moral law or the coming of His kingdom!

As far as abortion being acceptable in hard circumstances like rape, incest, or the health of the mother...

Lots of people walking around on this earth right now were conceived in ways that are undesirable, whether out of wedlock, or even through rape or incest. The fact that a person was conceived through rape (or even incest) doesn't diminish their value as a person or mean their lives, before birth, were of debatable value.

I cannot support killing the unborn just because the circumstances of their conception were less than ideal (or even terribly upsetting). Think about it: It would be terribly upsetting to become pregnant and have the father of the child abandon the mother. That would change the whole tone of the conception, no matter how willing the mother was or how romantic the evening was, but it would still not mean that the developing baby did not have value.

The value of human life is not dependent upon the circumstances of how that life began.

If elective abortion is wrong at all (and I believe that objectively considering what elective abortion actually is – what it actually involves – bears out that it is an evil act, whether a person is Catholic or not) then the circumstances of conception do not alter the morality of abortion.

You will also note that whenever anyone talks about outlawing abortion, they always mention rape, incest, or the life of the mother. You will recall that Roe vs. Wade was based on a lie, a false claim of rape. Rape was used to justify all abortion, and it does follow that if rape (or incest) justify abortion, then there couldn't be any reason abortion was not justified, every bit as much as it follows that because elective abortion is intrinsically evil, it may never be done, regardless of circumstances or intentions.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, January 03, 2007 at 10:07 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, January 02, 2007
The Gay-Friendly Archdiocese Of Los Angeles & The Sign Of The Fish
The Archdiocese of Los Angeles wants you to order a rainbow fish pin "as a sign of recognition of our lesbian and gay sisters and brothers".

Here is the web page: Ministry with Lesbian and Gay Catholics

Here are some quotes:

See in the fish pin a sign of recognition of our lesbian and gay sisters and brothers. The pin signals solidarity with all people of faith who promote justice and inclusivity for every person in their faith communities.

In 2006 we celebrated our 20th anniversary of this ministry. The Ministry with Lesbian and Gay Catholics was founded by Cardinal Roger Mahony on February 4, 1986 and is supported throughout the Archdiocese at parish level a an active outreach ministry with gay and lesbian Catholics, their parents, families and friends.

I have a question: How does wearing a rainbow fish pin help anyone? If I see someone wearing one, what should that lead me to think?

Does it mean the person is a homosexual? Is it meant to make it easier for homosexuals to recognize one another and connect?

Does it mean the person has a friend or relative who is homosexual? What, then, by wearing the rainbow fish do they want people to think or feel about homosexuality?

Why would a ministry to people with an intrinsically disordered orientation encourage people who have that orientation, as well as everybody else, to recognize and define the totality of a human person by their disordered orientation? Will they be making pins that assist alcoholics, drug addicts, and people with eating disorders in recognizing one another? How about a pin for people who are promiscuous or for people who tend to commit adultery? How about one for people who struggle with an addiction to internet pornography? Why not?

Is a disorder something to wear proudly, like a badge of honor?

I'm not suggesting that people should experience constant humiliation for their struggle with disordered inclinations. However, it seems to me that a pin like this is like The Scarlet Letter in reverse, and meant to acclimate people to accepting homosexuality, especially by encouraging people to wear the pin as a sign of solidarity.

I also had a problem with the ambiguity within the printed Mission Statement, especially the opening paragraph:

The Ministry With Lesbian and Gay Catholics (MLGC) recognizes that all persons with a homosexual orientation are capable of living a full Catholic life in union with all the members of the Church.

All Catholics who experience transient or more permanent homosexual tendencies are capable of living a full Catholic life, so long as they don't act on their homosexual tendencies – just as all Catholics who are tempted to rob liquor stores and steal old ladies' purses are capable of living a full Catholic life, so long as they don't rob liquor stores or steal old ladies' purses.

Then there was this:

MLGC calls on concerned Catholics and all people of good will to know and share in the challenges, burdens and blessings of homosexual persons living a Christian life within the Catholic tradition.

Does anyone else have a problem with the quoted section above?

Referencing a "homosexual person" seems to be another instance of identifying a disordered orientation as the defining element of a person's being. Does anyone else agree?

It is, indeed, a blessing for person with homosexual tendencies to live a Christian life within the Catholic tradition, because it means that such a person is not acting on their homosexual inclinations and resisting temptations to sin, but that doesn't appear to be what they're getting at when they speak of the "blessing of homosexual persons". It seems as though they want people to view having homosexual inclinations as a blessing. Does anyone else get that impression?

It seems to me that it's unhealthy to define yourself by identifying your disordered appetites (whatever they may be) with the totality of your human identity. All the language referencing "homosexual orientation" and "homosexual persons" and encouraging people to wear rainbow fish pins as a sign of their homosexual tendencies or their fond feelings about people who experience homosexual tendencies doesn't seem like something that's part of "the Catholic tradition".

Can you see St. Paul, any of the apostles, or the early Church fathers encouraging the early Christians to do something like this? Can you imagine any of the saints encouraging people to do so?

I haven't even mentioned that many people have reported that so-called "Lesbian & Gay Ministries" are (in some places) a thinly veiled means of allowing Catholics with homosexual inclinations to meet one another – like a singles group or a dating service.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, January 02, 2007 at 10:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0)
More On Illegal Immigration & The Catholic Perspective

This video is also available here: Illegal help illegals / Catholic point of view

This video segment is older, but it touches on issues raised in the last video segment on illegal immigration.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, January 02, 2007 at 07:46 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, December 30, 2006
Benedict XVI: Homosexuals Destroy Themselves


Dante and Virgil in Hell by William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1850)
Here's the story: Pope: Homosexuals destroy themselves

Here's a quote:

In his most powerful statements to date on issues involving sexual morality, Pope Benedict XVI said homosexuals end up destroying themselves so the Church has a duty to speak out on moral issues that affect the very spiritual and physical lives of man.
"In seeking to emancipate himself from his body (from the 'biological sphere'), [man] ends up by destroying himself," the pope told cardinals, archbishops, bishops and members of the Roman Curia last week in a traditional meeting overlooked by most of the world's press. "Against those who say that 'the Church should not involve herself in these matters,' we can only respond: does man not concern us too? The church and believers must raise their voices to defend man, the creature who, in the inseparable unity of body and spirit, is the image of God."


From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.


Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, December 30, 2006 at 01:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (27) | TrackBack (0)
Saddam Hussein, 1937-2006


A description of the event is here: Saddam's Hanging - Uncut

Now he's in God's hands.

Here's the story: Saddam Hussein's Brutal Reign Ends in the Gallows

In a Newsweek exclusive, the man hired to videotape Saddam Hussein’s execution recalls the brutal dictator’s humble final moments: ‘I Saw Fear, He Was Afraid’

"And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul; rather fear Him who can destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matthew 10:28)

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, December 30, 2006 at 07:48 AM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, December 28, 2006
Feast Of The Holy Innocents, Martyrs


Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and said, "Rise, take the child and his mother, and flee to Egypt, and remain there till I tell you; for Herod is about to search for the child, to destroy him."
And he rose and took the child and his mother by night, and departed to Egypt, and remained there until the death of Herod. This was to fulfil what the Lord had spoken by the prophet, "Out of Egypt have I called my son."

Then Herod, when he saw that he had been tricked by the wise men, was in a furious rage, and he sent and killed all the male children in Bethlehem and in all that region who were two years old or under, according to the time which he had ascertained from the wise men.

Then was fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet Jeremiah: "A voice was heard in Ramah, wailing and loud lamentation, Rachel weeping for her children; she refused to be consoled, because they were no more." (Matthew 2:13-18)


Please pray for an end to legal abortion.

Share this website with people you know: Just the facts

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, December 28, 2006 at 08:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, December 27, 2006
A Local Fox News Segment On The Rising Interest In The Mass Of The 1962 Missal


The segment may be viewed here: More Catholic Churches Return To Latin Mass

From the description on the FOX News site:

Catholic churches around the country are seeing a return to a more traditional way of prayer. Traditional Latin masses, which were banned for almost two decades, are now becoming a popular alternative to English masses for younger families.
Thanks to Shaw Tribe at The New Liturgical Movement for pointing out the segment.

This entry by Shawn Tribe is also worth reading: A call for a shift away from a vocabulary of polemic and inaccuracy

What are your thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, December 27, 2006 at 08:13 AM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)
Video: Illegal Immigrant Apologist Justifies Identity Theft

The above video is also available here: Michelle Malkin: Illegal Immigrant Apologist Justifies Identity Theft

I have all the respect in the world for hard working people who want a better life and work through legal channels to achieve their goals. The fact that the United States doesn't have an open border and many people from other countries would like things to be otherwise does not entitle people to disregard the law, especially at an unbelievably enormous expense to law-abiding, tax-paying, American citizens.

Moreover, it is not acceptable to lie, cheat, and steal in order to get a better life – such behavior violates the teaching of Christ that we are to treat others as we would wish to be treated. Identity theft can ruin a persons life for years. Wanting a better way of life is no excuse or ruining other people's lives.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, December 27, 2006 at 06:19 AM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, December 21, 2006
Study Finds That Most Americans Have Had Premarital Sex


Center panel from The Garden of Earthly Delights by Dutch painter, Hieronymus Bosch. (Painted circa 1504)
The latest report from the Alan Guttmacher Institute, the supposedly scientific research division of Planned Parenthood, says most Americans have been having premarital sex for decades.

Here's the story: Most Americans have had premarital sex, study finds

As LifeSite News has reported in the past on The Guttmacher Institute:

It’s true that the institute does not really hide its bias. “The institute's mission is to protect the reproductive choices of all women and men in the United States and throughout the world,” it says. “It is to support their ability to obtain the information and services needed to achieve their full human rights, safeguard their health and exercise their individual responsibilities in regard to sexual behavior and relationships, reproduction and family formation.” It doesn’t say so explicitly, but that clearly means that the institute is pro-abortion, pro-contraception, and pro-homosexual. And it is accurately described as pro-abortion, not pro-choice, because it advocates taxing Americans to pay for abortion.
Here's a shocker: Based on the results of their study, The Guttmacher Institute concludes that encouraging abstinence is 'unrealistic'

Quote:

Almost all Americans have premarital sex, says a report published Tuesday that analyzes federal data over time and suggests programs focusing on sexual abstinence until marriage may be unrealistic
One has to wonder if the conclusions of this research aren't rooted in skewed data. Especially in the light of what's known about other sexual research studies: Kinsey's Flawed Research

It's no surprise that associates of Planned Parenthood hate any attempt to focus on sexual abstinence, but it is sad that people want to listen to the illogical effluence exuding from the mouths of those who denigrate chastity, continence, and sexual abstinence because they preach a mythical gospel where all unpleasant consequences can be avoided through education and unnatural methods of contraception which denigrate human dignity and reduce an act designed for marriage into an act of mutual self-gratification involving synthetic chemicals and friction and fueled by lust. It is much easier to fantasize that all unpleasant consequences can be happily avoided by taking precautions that everyone acknowledges aren't 100% effective and which provide zero protection from emotional and spiritual damage (to say nothing of potential damnation) and which, when they fail, as they sometimes do, can spread fatal and/or life altering diseases or bring about new life that will potentially consign a child to a life of poverty, an unstable upbringing, or worst of all, be a source of temptation to consider abortion for the sake of convenience (because the "right" to abortion exists to facilitate the ability for women to have casual sex with men with whom they don't want to have children) rather than to endure any of the inconvenient difficulties required of self-control.

Why listen to the Lord, Who said:

"If any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me. For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for my sake, he will save it. For what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world and loses or forfeits himself? (Luke 9:23-25)

And Who promised:

Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me; for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." (Matthew 11:28-30)
One thing is certain, people will not be able to say they were never warned:

Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few. "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will know them by their fruits. "Not every one who says to me, `Lord, Lord,' shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. (Matthew 7:13-21)
For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, live as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is the belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things. But our commonwealth is in heaven, and from it we await a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will change our lowly body to be like his glorious body, by the power which enables him even to subject all things to himself. (Philippians 3:17-21)
...the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of men who by their wickedness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature, namely, his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse; for although they knew God they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking and their senseless minds were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for images resembling mortal man or birds or animals or reptiles.
Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.

For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. Their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural, and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameful acts with men and receiving in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and to improper conduct. They were filled with all (kinds of) unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, and malice. Full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malignity, they are gossips, backbiters, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, foolish, faithless, heartless, implacable, unmerciful. Though they know God’s decree that those who do such things deserve to die, they not only do them but approve those who practice them. (Romans 1:18-32)


Which leads one to reflect upon the right panel in The Garden of Earthly Delights by Hieronymus Bosch:



Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, December 21, 2006 at 11:14 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)
Notorious Pro-homosexual Catholic Dissident, Sister Jeannine Gramick, Named 2006 Mother Teresa Award Laureate


And he said to his disciples, "Temptations to sin are sure to come; but woe to him by whom they come! It would be better for him if a millstone were hung round his neck and he were cast into the sea, than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin. (Luke 17:1-2)
Sister Jeannine Gramick has been awarded as the 2006 Mother Teresa Award Laureate.

Here's the story: Notorious Pro-homosexual Catholic Dissident Named 2006 Mother Teresa Award Laureate

Here's a quote:

Sister Jeannine Gramick, who became a notorious figure after she was ordered by the Vatican in 2000 to desist from all pastoral work involving homosexuals, has been honored by being named a 2006 Mother Teresa Award Laureate. The award was presented to Sr. Gramick this past November.
Begun in 2005, the Mother Teresa Awards were instituted to "recognize the achievements for those who beautify the world, especially in the fields of religion, social justice and the arts," according to the Awards website. In the past, the award, which is sponsored by the St. Bernadette Institute of Sacred Art, has been given to such prominent and orthodox Catholic figures as Mother Angelica, John Paul II, and Fr. Benedict Groeschel.

According to the Institute Sr. Gramick was named a Mother Teresa Awards Laureate, "for her role as American Human Rights Activist, especially in the field of Spirituality." In particular the Awards website mentions the fact that she co-founded the pro-homosexual, "social-justice" organization New Ways Ministry.

Sr. Gramick's public life has been dedicated almost exclusively to promoting the idea that homosexuality is a legitimate "alternative" lifestyle and is morally acceptable to the Catholic Church. On account of the nature of her "ministry", in 2000 Gramick - along with the co-founder of New Ways Ministry, Father Robert Nugent-was ordered by the Vatican to discontinue all ministry with homosexuals. The Vatican statement charged that Gramick's teachings on homosexuality "have caused confusion among the Catholic people and have harmed the community of the Church."

In her public response to the Vatican notification Sr. Gramick made clear her intent to disobey the Vatican order to remain silent and desist from ministry. Since then she has continued to be active in the effort to promote the homosexual lifestyle, as well as homosexual "marriage", and has continually and vocally condemned Catholic teachings and documents on homosexuality.


Pray for Sister Gramick and those who listen to her.

Flashback:

Notification Concerning Sr. Jeannine Gramick, SSND, and Fr. Robert Nugent, SDS (A note issued July 13, 1999 signed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger with the express approval of Pope John Paul II regarding Father Robert Nugent's, and Sister Jeannine Gramick's, dissent from the Church's teaching on homosexuality.)

Side Note:

People have complained in the past when I have discussed homosexuality on Roman Catholic blog, because they argued that it is not an issue worth dwelling upon.

I like what Rod Dreher had to say in response to similar complaints here: Gay Evangelicals

Quote:

Like I said the other day when certain readers groused about the attention this blog gives to homosexuality, it is one of the central issues of our time, and the response to it is cleaving the Christian churches. People who complain about the time conservatives spend on the issue wouldn’t complain if we were taking the Andrew Sullivan gay liberationist line. It’s that we don’t do so that they dislike. If we can’t say something nice and cheerful, we shouldn’t say anything at all.
Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, December 21, 2006 at 08:21 AM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, December 20, 2006
Bishop Bernard Fellay: "I am sure of a 'happy ending'"
Rorate Caeli reports that the Superior-General of the Priestly Fraternity of Saint Pius X (FSSPX/SSPX), Bishop Bernard Fellay, has said he believes there will be a happy resolution between the Society of St. Pius X and the Holy See.

Here is the story: Fellay: "I am sure of a 'happy ending'"

Here's a quote:

An agreement with Rome, when?
-It is impossible to say. It had been assured to us that the text "liberalizing" the Tridentine Mass would be published in October 2005 [sic]. That has still not happened. The Pope wishes to proceed fast. We say to him: softly. It is an atomic bomb, which must not be exploded! Before landing, we make the effort of preparing the runway. We have proposed a roadmap. We do not set conditions for Rome, but the shattered confidence must be regained. The "liberalization" of the Mass and the removal of the excommunication would be a sign which would open a phase of doctrinal discussion. Efforts by Rome to remove the Church from its current situation of paralysis would also be a sign. I am sure of a "happy ending". But when? We pray. For us, the Church is supernatural. What is essential is of the order of grace.


We should all pray for this reconciliation to happen. It would be a tremendous blessing. There are obstacles, to be sure, but we are called to work toward Christian unity. Let's hope that Catholic bishops will be willing to extend their ecumenical spirit to the SSPX.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, December 20, 2006 at 10:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Joy & Depression

What are your thoughts on this homily?

You can also find it here: Catholic priest preaches on joy and depression

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 at 08:45 AM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBack (0)

Friday, December 15, 2006
Motu Propio After Christmas, Apostolic Exhortation In January
The Catholic News Agency is reporting that the Motu Proprio allowing for the universal use of the Missal of St. Pius V "may" be published after Christmas.

The article is here: Motu Propio after Christmas, Apostolic Exhortation in January

The text of the whole article follows:

Rome, Dec. 15, 2006 (CNA) - Sources close to the Vatican have told Catholic News Agency that the Motu Propio by which Pope Benedict XVI would allow for the universal use of the Missal of St. Pius V may be published after Christmas, while the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation on the Eucharist could come in mid-January 2007.
Sources confirmed the recent statements to reporters by Cardinal Jorge Medina Estevez, who told them after participating in a meeting of the Ecclesia Dei Commission, where the text of the Motu Propio was reviewed, that the document would come soon.

The declaration would allow the Mass of St. Pius V—often called the Tridentine Mass—to be celebrated freely and do away with the current requirement to have the explicit permission of the local bishop. The Motu Propio does not address the canonical status of the Society of St. Pius X, the schismatic organization founded by Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.

The Apostolic Exhortation on the Eucharist, according to the same sources, has already been finished by Pope Benedict XVI and is being translated into the different languages in which it will be presented.

The document, which sources say will be issued after January 15, reaffirms the Church’s commitment to a celibate priesthood, encourages the use of Latin in liturgical celebrations, and even requests that seminarians learn the language as part of their formation.

It will also promote the recovery of Gregorian chant and sacred polyphonic music as a replacement to modern music, which would result in a gradual elimination of musical instruments that are “inappropriate” for the solemnity and reverence of the Eucharistic celebration.


Shawn Tribe of The New Liturgical Movement covers the story here: Motu Propio after Christmas, Apostolic Exhortation in January

Posted by Thomistic on Friday, December 15, 2006 at 05:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, December 14, 2006
CRCOA: Petition To Remove Bishop Tod Brown & Fr. Fred Bailey


A Member of CROCA has sent me the following message:

Dear Friends,

Please go to Concerned Roman Catholics Of America's website to sign the petition to have Fr. Fred Bailey (Barney) removed.

If you've not seen the videos of Fr. Fred Bailey's Halloween Masses they are at:

Halloween Mass

Halloween Mass 3 - The Barney Blessing

If you are not aware of why Catholics are extremely concerned about Bishop Tod Brown, see here: Open Letter to Tod Brown, Bishop of Orange, and here: Vocations director under fire in California, for just some of the reasons for the serious concern among many of the faithful about Bishop Tod David Brown.

CRCOA has assured that the names of those who sign the petition will remain confidential.

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, December 14, 2006 at 10:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)
More Information On The Plenary Session Of Ecclesia Dei

Rorate Caeli has more details about the plenary session of the Ecclesia Dei Commission here: Some more information on yesterday's meeting

Here's the meat of the story:

In the order of the day for the meeting was also a discussion on the juridical framework in which to place the Lefebvrists after their readmission into full communion with the Holy See.
The debated questions were, thus, two. ...

Benedict XVI intends to extend the indult of his predecessor, in fact withdrawing from the bishops discretionary power on the matter: the Missal of Saint Pius V is no longer abolished, and even if the ordinary Roman Rite is that originated from the post-conciliar liturgical reform, the old one -- used by centuries in the Church -- can subsist as an "extraordinary rite".

The bishops, therefore, will not be able to deny the ancient mass anymore, but only regulate its eventual celebration, together with the parish priests, harmonising it with the need of the community. The corrections included would have reduced from 50 to 30 the minimal number of faithful who ask for the celebration according to the old rite. As for the readmission of the Lefebvrists, once the rite of Saint Pius V is liberalized, the deal should be easier.


Shawn Tribe at The New Liturgical Movement also covers the story: Further possible insights into the Motu Proprio?

Jimmy Akin has more details you won't want to miss here: Tridentine Mass Liberalization News/Rumors

The Cafeteria is Closed is covering the story here: Motu proprio?

This looks better than the compromises I had feared would result from the protests of a handful of liberal bishops.

I haven't been this excited since Christmas as a kid!

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, December 14, 2006 at 09:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
A Sacrilegious Clown Mass In The Oakland Diocese


If you have trouble viewing the video above, you can also view it here: A Sacrilegious Clown Mass In The Oakland Diocese

An introductory extract from The Instruction Concerning Worship of the Eucharistic Mystery (Inaestimabile Donum)

Prepared by the Sacred Congregation for the Sacraments and Divine Worship Approved and Confirmed by His Holiness Pope John Paul II April 17, 1980

This Sacred Congregation notes with great joy the many positive results of the liturgical reform: a more active and conscious participation by the faithful in the liturgical mysteries, doctrinal and catechetical enrichment through the use of the vernacular, and the wealth of readings from the Bible, a growth in the community sense of liturgical life, and successful efforts to close the gap between life and worship, between Liturgical piety and personal piety, and between Liturgy and popular piety.
But these encouraging and positive aspects cannot suppress concern at the varied and frequent abuses being reported from different parts of the Catholic world: the confusion of roles, especially regarding the priestly ministry and the role of the laity (indiscriminate shared recitation of the Eucharistic Prayer, homilies given by lay people, lay people distributing Communion while the priests refrain from doing so); an increasing loss of the sense of the sacred (abandonment of liturgical vestments, the Eucharist celebrated outside church without real need, lack of reverence and respect for the Blessed Sacrament, etc.); misunderstanding of the ecclesial character of the Liturgy (the use of private texts, the proliferation of unapproved Eucharistic Prayers, the manipulation of the liturgical texts for social and political ends) . In these cases we are face to face with a real falsification of the Catholic Liturgy: "One who offers worship to God on the Church's behalf in a way contrary to that which is laid down by the Church with God-given authority and which is customary in the Church is guilty of falsification."[7]

None of these things can bring good results. The consequences are--and cannot fail to be--the impairing of the unity of Faith and worship in the Church, doctrinal uncertainty, scandal and bewilderment among the People of God, and the near inevitability of violent reactions.


It's time for an end to the wave of liturgical experimentation and liturgical abuse that has overtaken the Catholic Church in many parts of the world. The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass needs to be celebrated with reverence and dignity.

Clown Masses and Halloween Masses (with Barney Blessings) demonstrate an appalling ignorance as to what really and truly takes place during Holy Mass: The Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist

One would like to believe Masses like these are isolated incidents, but there is evidence that abuses like these (and other reprobated liturgical abuses) are quite common in the United States and abroad.

How long is such nonsense to be tolerated? How many warnings from the Holy See reprobating such actions need to be written, promulgated, and ignored, before more concrete action is taken? The abuses have to stop.

One way to stop them is to expose them. That's where YouTube and Catholic Blogs can be of invaluable assistance.

I intend to post footage of liturgical abuses in various dioceses throughout the United States here on Roman Catholic Blog. I do it not to spread scandal, but rather to assist in putting an end to such abuses. Whatever else may be said about exposing these things, it cannot be denied that the ones exposed do not like it. Which makes one wonder how they think what they are doing is so wonderful if they are angered by actions that expose what they are doing?

Bottom line: the darkness still hates the light.

Feel free to utilize YouTube to upload videos of legitimate liturgical abuse or heretical teachings. E-mail me the link to the video on YouTube at thomistic@romancatholicblog.com. If your video is appropriate, I will post it here.

Other videos:

Catholic Halloween Mass

Halloween Mass

Halloween Mass 3 - The Barney Blessing

Another Halloween Mass

The 2006 Los Angeles archdiocesan Religious Education Congress, Closing Liturgy

Vocations Crisis

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, December 14, 2006 at 08:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, December 13, 2006
Promising Reports From The Plenary Session of Ecclesia Dei

You may want to dust off your Tridentine Missals, or get one if you haven't got one already.

Shawn Tribe over at The New Liturgical Movement cites a translation of an ANSA News agency article that says: "The publication of the Motu Proprio on the part of the Pope which will liberalise the celebration of the Mass in Latin according to the missal of Saint Pius V is close"

Here's the story: Reports coming out following Plenary Session of Ecclesia Dei

Here's the quote:

ANSA) - VATICAN CITY, Dec. 12. The publication of the Motu Proprio on the part of the Pope which will liberalise the celebration of the Mass in Latin according to the missal of Saint Pius V is close` confirmed Cardinal Jorge Arturo Medina Estevez, member of the Commission Ecclesia Dei which this morning met to discuss the liberalisation of the [1962] Mass in Latin. "We have studied the document calmly" the cardinal affirmed. "We have discussed together for more than four hours and have made some corrections to the text of the Motu Proprio." The next move belongs to Cardinal Dario Castrillon Hoyos (President of the Commission) who will present the text to Benedict XVI. Perhaps, added Medina, there will be another meeting of the Ecclesia Dei commission. [NLM Note: Thanks to a reader for pointing out that in the original French language report, Medina is actually quoted as saying another meeting probably won't be necessary -- "ne serait probablement pas necessaire". This is not necessarily an inaccuracy on the part of ANSI, but may be simply lost in the unofficial translation.] Another member of the body, the Cardinal of Lyon [correction: Bordeaux], Jean Pierre Ricard, did not want to make any comment, emphasizing that he is "bound by the pontifical secret".
Rorate Caeli covers the same story here: An eminent confirmation

Catholic World News is also covering the story: Ecclesia Dei commission discusses papal document

We'll see what happens.

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, December 13, 2006 at 09:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (9) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, December 12, 2006
Our Lady of Guadalupe, Patroness of the Americas – Feast Day: December 12th



'Put this in your heart, my little son: do not be afraid. Am I not here, Me, your mother? Are you not under my shadow, under my care? Am I not the fountain of joy? Are you not in the crease of my cloak, in the fold of my arms? Do you need anything else?' ~ Our Lady of Guadalupe to St. Juan Diego

Today is the Feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Patroness of the Americas.

For those who are unfamiliar with the story of Our Lady of Guadalupe, click here: The Apparitions and the Miracle

See also: The Mystery in Our Lady's eyes

Miraculous properties of the image of Our Lady of Guadalupe (from the Wikipedia article, Our Lady of Guadalupe):

Some consider it miraculous that the tilma maintains its structural integrity after nearly 500 years. In addition to withstanding the elements the tilma has also resisted a 1791 ammonia spill and a 1921 bomb blast.
Image of a bearded man found in the Virgin's eye.

Photographers and ophthalmologists have claimed to locate images reflected in the eyes of the Virgin.

In 1929 and 1951 photographers found a figure reflected in the Virgin's eyeballs; upon inspection they said that the reflection was tripled in what is called the Purkinje effect. This effect is commonly found in human eyeballs. The opthalmologist Dr. Jose Aston Tonsmann later enlarged the image of the Virgin's eyeballs by 2500x magnification and said he saw not only the aforementioned single figure, but rather images of all the witnesses present when the tilma was shown to the Bishop in 1531. Tonsmann also reported seeing a small family – mother, father, and a group of children – in the center of the Virgin's eyeballs.

In response to the eyeball miracles, Joe Nickell and John F. Fischer wrote in Skeptical Inquirer that images seen in the Virgin's eyes could be the result of the human tendency to form familiar shapes from random patterns, much like a psychologist's inkblots – a phenomenon known as religious pareidolia.

Richard Kuhn, who received the 1938 Nobel Chemistry prize, is said to have analyzed a sample of the fabric in 1936 and said the tint on the fabric was not from a known mineral, vegetable, or animal source.

In 1979 Philip Serna Callahan studied the icon with infrared light and stated that portions of the face, hands, robe, and mantle had been painted in one step, with no sketches or corrections and no paintbrush strokes.


The original image of Our Lady of Guadalupe hangs in the Basilica de Guadalupe in Mexico City

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 at 04:47 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, December 11, 2006
Milingo Strikes Again

Excommunicated Archbishop Emmanuel Milingo has consecrated two more married men as bishops.

Here's the story: Excommunicated cleric installs married men as bishops

Milingo has been supported in his call for married clergy by the "Rev." Sun Myung Moon.

God help Milingo. There is much evidence to support the notion that he is mentally ill.

God help the confused, agenda-driven men who abandoned their priestly vocations and their promises of celibacy (or vows of chastity, if they were religious), and who are now happily using Milingo's lack of mental stability in order to be consecrated as bishops as a power play in order to threaten the Holy See with schism, as well. They may well be more culpable than Milingo.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, December 11, 2006 at 11:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (26) | TrackBack (1)
Ecclesia Dei Meeting Tomorrow To Discuss Liberalization
Rorate Caeli blog cites an article in La Repubblica which says:

Benedict XVI shortens the timing for a reconciliation with the followers of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre
The "Ecclesia Dei" Commission, established for this purpose by John Paul II, will meet tomorrow in a first plenary session to discuss the question of the liberalization of the Mass in Latin.


Shawn Tribe's blog, The New Liturgical Movement, also has a post on the subject: Ecclesia Dei to meet re: Motu Proprio

This leads me to quote a post from "What Does the Prayer Really Say" by Fr. Zuhlsdorf:

(To be sung to the tune of White Christmas)

I’m dreaming of a broad indult,
and chant restored to pride of place.
Mass ad orientem,
Usque venientem,*
would be a wondrous Christmas grace.

I’m dreaming of a broad indult,
Just like we’ve heard through the grapevine
May we all be turned towards the divine
And may Christmas Mass be Tridentine!

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, December 11, 2006 at 10:54 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, December 07, 2006
Tridentine Liberalization Rumors Abound

Tridentine liberalization rumors continue to bubble to the surface. The Cafeteria is Closed blog had this piece on the latest rumors: More concrete rumors about Tridentine liberation

Here's the meat of that piece:

1) The document will definitely be a Motu Proprio. (That means it will be from the Pope and not a document of a Congregation or joint document issued by different dicasteries.)
2) At the beginning of November it was in its final draft, after four revisions.

3) During the third week of November it was suggested that the document might come out in about three weeks. This would put it around… well… now.

4) It will authorize private celebration of Mass with the 1962 Missal by any priest as he chooses. Public Masses will be regulated by the bishop.

5) What a "private" Mass is will be defined in the document. A number will be established for what constitutes a "private" Mass. Provided the group is that size, no permission of the bishop will be necessary.

6) If I understand it right, and I admit I might be confused, there might be something in the document about greater numbers of people (than what would constitute a "private" Mass) being allowed to attend without the bishop’s permission so long as a Mass in the Novus Ordo is first provided for those who want it. I am not sure about this element, but it might be a prudent solution. If I am right about this element of the document, the idea would be to ensure that a priest doesn’t simply stop offering people the chance to attend the Novus Ordo and thus force everyone to go to the older form. See what I mean?

7) The document will stress the obligation of bishops to be "generous" in allowing the older form of Mass to be offered publicly with language much strong than that in the Motu Proprio "Ecclesia Dei adflicta" of John Paul II.


I'm a bit disappointed if this rumor is accurate, in so far as still needing permission from the local ordinary for non-private Tridentine Rite Masses. What if the local ordinary isn't Tridentine friendly? What if the local ordinary believes that one indult Mass in a small, cramped chapel (such as the Serra Chapel at the Mission San Juan Capistrano, in the Diocese of Orange, for instance) is suitable enough to accommodate the needs of his diocese?

I'm basically asking what to do if your bishop is Bishop Tod David Brown?

What if the Tridentine indult Mass in your diocese is only offered at 8:00 A.M. on Sundays and non-transferred Holy Days, as in Orange County, California?

The indult Tridentine Mass in the Diocese of Orange is attended by 300+ persons every Sunday, and 450+ on the first Sunday of every month. The Serra Chapel is designed to hold approximately 120 persons. Many of the faithful drive from as far as 50 miles away to attend the Tridentine indult Mass there because it is the closest one in their area. The Mass is at 8:00 AM, and they should plan to arrive up to 45 minutes early if they plan to get a seat!

It seems to me that strong words encouraging more generosity won't be enough to prevent a bishop like Bishop Tod Brown who has already ended the celebration of an indult Tridentine Mass in one parish, and cracks down on kneeling after the Angus Dei and agrees that parishioners who continue to kneel after the Agnus Dei are not fit to serve the parish in any official capacity or through parish associations like the Legion of Mary, the Altar Guild, or the Society of St. Vincent de Paul, but who ignores the fact that about five parishes in his diocese stand through the consecration (and don't even have kneelers in the church) from continuing to thwart the celebration of the Tridentine Mass. How can a bishop who demands that kneeling communicants stand, even demeaning them, if he deems it necessary, and tolerates Halloween Masses and Barney Blessings, but doesn't correct a priest for telling his parishioners that their continued kneeling after the Agnus Dei was serious disobedience and mortal sin and invites over fifty people to leave both the parish and the Diocese of Orange until the Los Angeles Times does a cover story about the situation, be trusted to be generous in allowing public celebration of the Tridentine Mass?

But, I digress... and there are more "concrete" rumors to mention.

The Wanderer recently published an interview with Fr. Joseph Fessio, and Brian Mershon has published highlights of the interview in this article: False ecumenism, excessive dialogue... Fr. Fessio calls it "nonsense" and a "smokescreen"

The entire article is worth reading, but here are some highlights:

Q. How significant do you believe the Pope's address to the Curia in December 2005 was for the outline of his pontificate — that is, "the hermeneutics of reform" or what some call "continuity" versus the "hermeneutics of rupture"?
A. He repeated on December 22 what he said in his original address. His plan is to implement Vatican II in light of 2,000 years of Tradition.

He is obviously aware of the liturgical discontinuity.

At the same time, he knows that rapid changes cause consternation in the pews and in some cases, people even the leave the Church. Therefore, the modifications he might undertake most likely will be measured and well thought out.

Unfortunately for traditionalists, he fears to disturb the sensibilities of people in the pews again — even if it is to correct things that were clearly mistakes. He knows that people have left the Church due to these changes before and is cautious out of concern they might do the same thing again. Those who love tradition are at a disadvantage.

However, the papal Masses from day one have been different with more chant, more polyphony, and more Latin.

Archbishop Ranjith is a very important appointment. As the secretary for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, he performs more of the day-to-day tasks. I also think that the appointment of a new secretary of state is significant. He can count on Cardinal Bertone.

The Pope has reportedly already written the post-synodal exhortation and has written a motu proprio too. I don't know what is in them. But at the 2001 Fontomgbault Conference, Cardinal Ratzinger said he thought the Holy See should let the Traditional Roman rite coexist with the Novus Ordo to show continuity.


Q. With the public protest by the French bishops and priests against the supposedly imminent document freeing the Traditional Latin Mass, do you personally believe this document will be issued? Do you have any predictions as to when?
A. I know through a person the Holy Father had spoken to that by September 10, he had written it, and it was in its third draft. I hope he recognizes in this resistance a reason for being clear and firm in the motu proprio.

He is a gentleman though, so it might affect him. He should know this is going to be a big issue with some of the bishops, but I hope that is not a deterrent.

The only people who seem to object are feminists and liberal bishops.

I hope the response is gentle firmness, but with no adjustments to the motu proprio.

Q. What do you expect to see from the post-synod document? Any more fixes for the Novus Ordo? Encouraging ad orientem celebrations, more Latin, and maybe Gregorian chant?

A. I am hoping these will be in one or both of the two documents, but I have no knowledge whether or not this is the case.

There is some hope that with the Bertone appointment, who is someone he knows well, will support him with his positions.

A New Label

Q. Please clarify for our readers your personal view on the Traditional Latin Mass. Would you offer it if it is freed up by the Pope for all Latin rite priests?

A. I don't like calling it the "Traditional Latin Mass" because I think the way I celebrate the Novus Ordo Mass is traditional. I've been thinking about trying to introduce a new label: the Vetus [Editor's Note: "old"] Ordo. I have objections to both the Novus Ordo and the Vetus Ordo as they are at present. I think it is normal for there to be gradual, organic change in the Mass. Vatican II called for this, but it was hijacked. The Novus Ordo goes beyond the kind of development both liturgical history and Vatican II sanction.

Because I'm a priest, I don't have the most critical problem facing a layman: uncertainty about how Mass will be celebrated, unless one attends a Vetus Ordo Mass. So I have always preferred the lonely moderate position of celebrating the Novus Ordo in the most traditional manner.

Q. If the Traditional rite is freed, would you offer it publicly and daily/weekly at Ave Maria University?

A. As to what will happen at Ave Maria University, that depends on a number of factors: what the motu proprio permits or encourages; what the university community desires; and what those in charge decide. I'm not the one responsible for the liturgy at Ave Maria University.


Here's my favorite line: "The only people who seem to object [to the liberalization of the Tridentine Rite] are feminists and liberal bishops."

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, December 07, 2006 at 08:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Halloween Mass 3 - The Barney Blessing
You can check out the third and final segment posted of the infamous Halloween Mass that took place in the Diocese of Orange here: Halloween Mass 3 - The Barney Blessing

Just when I thought the footage couldn't seem any goofier...

I am confused as to why the parishioners didn't seem to think this behavior was inappropriate or even out of the ordinary.

I suspect the frog in warming water theory might explain some of it, but that would indicate that they are used to a good deal of silliness to accept this as just another way of worshipping.

See also:

Diocese of Orange Halloween Mass: Fr. Fred Bailey's Highly Nuanced, Carefully Qualified Apology To Bishop Tod Brown

Satan's Thanksgiving

The Sacrilegeous Halloween Mass: A Cartoon Commentary

Devils Distributing Communion: Bishop Tod Brown's Kind Of Diversity

The Blasphemous Halloween Masses: More Footage

Orange Diocese Halloween Mass: Listen To The Music

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, December 05, 2006 at 02:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, December 04, 2006
Cardinal Claudio Hummes, prefect of the Congregation for Clergy, Urges The Church To Allow Priests To Marry
Cardinal Claudio Hummes, prefect of the Congregation for Clergy, has urged the Church to allow married clergy.

Here's a quote:

"Celibacy is a discipline, not a dogma of the church," Hummes was quoted as saying by the Folha de S. Paulo newspaper. "Certainly, the majority of the apostles were married. In this modern age, the church must observe these things, it has to advance with history."
A Vatican spokesman could not be reached for comment Sunday. But the Vatican has strongly resisted calls for relaxing its celibacy rule.


Here's the story: Cardinal Urges Church To Allow Priests To Marry

Why Cardinal Hummes would make such a statement in the press so soon after the Holy See made its present position on the matter clear is anyone's guess.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, December 04, 2006 at 10:00 AM | Permalink | Comments (36) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Movie With Partial Birth Abortion Plotline Seeks To Educate, Provoke Thought

Click above or here to view the trailer: A Distant Thunder Trailer

Here is a clip from the film:

Click above or here to view the clip: A Distant Thunder Film Clip

Click here to learn more about the film: A Distant Thunder

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, November 28, 2006 at 09:42 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, November 22, 2006
Another Halloween Mass

The photos in the slideshow linked below were taken at St. Kenneth "Catholic Community" parish in Plymouth Township, Michigan has posted images from their 2006 Halloween Mass.

You can view the slideshow here: Halloween Mass 2006, by St. Kenneth Catholic Community

Why do people think it is appropriate to dress in witches' hats and paint their children in zombie make-up for Mass?







What is missing in the catechesis in parishes where the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is seen as little more than an excuse to "gather" and have fun as a "community"?



I will say this: My first impression was that Fr. Fred Bailey's Halloween Mass in Orange County, California was worse, primarily because of the costumes worn by the priest and the people in the sanctuary, but the St. Kenneth "Catholic Community" isn't faring much better.

Gerald Augustinus wrote about the second Mass here: Another Halloween Mass, this time in Michigan

Amy Welborn did an excellent analysis of this second Halloween Mass here: Boo

Amy caught something I hadn't:

At first I thought the priest's costume was some sort of medieval clerical robe tossed over his vestments. The musicians seemed to be doing a Renaissance thing, so it seemed logical. But in reading the comments at Gerald's and studying the photos, I saw...no. The red cape and hood are a devil costume! Which, apparently, during the homily, the priest turns inside out to reveal a white cape - an angel. It appears from the one slide of the rest of Mass, he ditches the costume for the Liturgy of the Eucharist. Well.
I suppose a priest dressed as a devil at Mass may top even Fr. Fred. Who thought that was possible?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, November 22, 2006 at 03:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (15) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, November 20, 2006
Diocese of Orange Halloween Mass: Fr. Fred Bailey's Highly Nuanced, Carefully Qualified Apology To Bishop Tod Brown

Fr. Fred Bailey, the pastor of Corpus Christi "Catholic-Christian Community" in Aliso Viejo (in the Diocese of Orange) has apologized to Bishop Tod Brown for the Halloween Masses he encouraged at his parish. (Here is some alternate footage: Catholic Halloween Mass)

Below is the complete text of his highly nuanced and carefully qualified apology:

November 8, 2006
Dear Bishop Brown:

Since 1998, when we first began celebrating liturgies here in Aliso Viejo, a particular dynamic has always been the youthfulness of our community with an obvious abundance of children. With this in mind, many of our programs have been developed to be of service to them and it was in this spirit that we began inviting children to wear their Halloween costumes to the Masses on the weekend prior to Halloween. Many parents inquired if they too could wear costumes so as to make it a family event, and thus, a Halloween tradition of having parishioners in costume at Mass was born. Based on our Catholic-Christian grounding of faith in Jesus Christ, we know that the assorted costumes of Halloween are a manner of poking fun and holding up to the light of Christ’s Resurrection the things that may have
once frightened us.

I am aware that my enthusiasm for our family celebration of Halloween has caused me to neglect my pastoral duties of providing appropriate direction and instruction to our people regarding appropriate/inappropriate costumes. Prior to the weekend of October 28-29 I failed to adequately instruct our assorted liturgical ministers as to what might be appropriate apparel for their ministry. Because of this oversight on my part, we had some lay ministers of communion attired in devil horns and assorted other costumes that, in hindsight, I could easily have prevented if I had been more attentive to my pastoral duties. Bishop Brown, I stress to you the goodness and faith-filled integrity of the ministers who were so attired, they are some of our most involved and faithful members. They accepted me at my word in regards to their costume making fun of fearful things, and would be mortified to think that they gave offense to people of good faith. The lay ministers are innocent of any wrongdoing, the offense is mine and I take full responsibility.

I realize that my pastoral neglect and lack of prudent judgment has caused great concern and offense to many in the Church. I have given my life as a priest to the Church of the Diocese of Orange and it causes me great pain to realize that my lapse in judgment could so easily transform a wonderful family tradition into something questionable and repugnant to people of good faith. From my heart I apologize to you and to the larger community of the faithful for my pastoral neglect.

I await your counsel and assistance in determining an appropriate manner of making amends for this matter.

Sincerely, Reverend Fred K. Bailey


You can also read the apology here (scroll down – the apology is near the bottom of the second page): Corpus Christi Bulletin, November 18-19, 2006

Note that Fr. Fred does not admit that wearing Halloween costumes at a special Halloween centered Mass is not appropriate for adults or children. Note that Fr. Fred does not apologize for bragging about having an extraordinary minister dressed as a devil and saying that there is nothing wrong with this, even having gone so far as to boast: "Now there's a switch! Only at Corpus Christi does the devil himself become a Eucharistic minister! You knew we were twisted!" In his apology, Fr. Bailey claims that the inappropriate costumes were merely an oversight. If having a woman dressed as a demon while distrubuting the Blessed Sacrament (while Fr. Fred sat down and sang "open my eyes, Lord...help me to see" – which is more than a little ironic) was only an embarrassing oversight, why did he highlight it as an example of how delightfully twisted folks are at Corpus Christi "Catholic-Christian Community" during the next Mass?

What's this business about "people of good faith"? Does anyone else think this is a subtle way of saying that some of those who did not approve of the Halloween Mass are not "people of good faith"?

Fr. Fred also describes an earlier Halloween Mass (and demonstrates his theological perspective and homiletic style) here: "It's Just A Pumpkin," Los Angeles Lay Catholic Mission, January 2001

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, November 20, 2006 at 09:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (24) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, November 18, 2006
Satan's Thanksgiving


Here's what Satan doesn't want you to see:

Write to:

His Eminence
Cardinal Francis Arinze
Prefect
Cong. for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments
00120 Vatican City State

Here are some things you can write about: Open Letter to Tod Brown, Bishop of Orange

If you need more reasons, see also:

The Sacrilegeous Halloween Mass: A Cartoon Commentary

Devils Distributing Communion: Bishop Tod Brown's Kind Of Diversity

The Blasphemous Halloween Masses: More Footage

Orange Diocese Halloween Mass: Listen To The Music

Now On YouTube: Bishop Tod Brown Refuses To Give Holy Communion To A Kneeling Woman

Bishop Tod Brown: More Defiance In Orange County?

Why Does Bishop Tod Brown Support Rod Stephens?

Bishop Brown To Orange County Catholics: Let's Get Spiritual!

Bishop Brown's Empire Strikes Back: No Tridentine For You!

St. Mary's by the Sea Liturgical Reeducation Camp

Cartoon: The Diocese of Orange Implements New USCCB Decision On Communion For Pro-Abortion Politicians

A Ban on Kneeling? Some Catholics Won’t Stand for It

Bishop Tod Brown Bans Kneeling At Traditional Times During The Liturgy

Roman Catholic Blog: Humor Archives

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, November 18, 2006 at 04:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

Thursday, November 16, 2006
Vocations Crisis: Another Must Watch Video

You can also see this video here: Vocations Crisis

Posted by Thomistic on Thursday, November 16, 2006 at 12:20 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, November 15, 2006
Faithful Catholics: You've Got To Watch This!

This video can also be viewed here: Orthodox Catholic

I love the ending. Let's hope it's true.

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 at 11:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)
The USCCB: On Issues Of Substance
The USCCB is talking about issues of substance, namely who may receive the Holy Eucharist. Catholic moral teaching on sexual morality is also being discussed. They have also been talking about music in the liturgy.

There was some back and forth between Bishop Burke and Bishop Niederauer on the Chastity based group, Courage, which ministers to those with same-sex attractions and their loved ones. Bishop Burke wanted the USCCB to endorse Courage. Bishop Niederauer was against it.

I am pleased with Bishop Burke: Burke takes lead role at meeting

Here are some articles:

U.S. Catholic bishops tackle contraception, gays, communion

Bishops stress sexual issues and warn on Communion

Serious sin a bar to receiving Communion, bishops say in new document

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 at 10:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBack (1)

Sunday, November 12, 2006
Elton John: "I Would Ban Religion Completely"
To the left is a picture of Elton John with his "husband" David Furnish. According to the Drudge Report, "Sir Elton John wants religion banned completely – because he believes it promotes hatred of gays." Here's the story: Elton John: "I Would Ban Religion Completely"

Quote:

In a candid interview for a dedicated Gay issue of Observer Music Monthly Magazine he shared his views on topics as varied as being a pop icon to Tony Blair's stance on the war in Iraq.
He said there was a lack of religious leadership, particularly in world politics, and complained that people do not take to the streets to protest any more.

Sir Elton said: "I think religion has always tried to turn hatred towards gay people. Religion promotes the hatred and spite against gays. But there are so many people I know who are gay and love their religion. From my point of view I would ban religion completely. Organised religion doesn't seem to work. It turns people into really hateful lemmings and it's not really compassionate."

He added: "The world is near escalating to World War Three and where are the leaders of each religion? Why aren't they having a conclave? Why aren't they coming together? I said this after 9/11 and people thought I was nuts. Instead of more violence why isn't there a meeting of religious leaders?"

"It's like the peace movement in the Sixties. Musicians got through to people by getting out there and doing peace concerts but we don't seem to do them any more."

"If John Lennon were alive today he'd be leading it with a vengeance," he said.

Sir Elton said people were too busy blogging on the internet to go out onto the streets to stand up for what they believed in. "They seem to do their protesting online and that's not good enough. You have to get out there and be seen to be vocal, and you've got to do it time and time again. There was a big march in London when Britain decided to join the war against Iraq and Tony Blair is on the record as saying 'the people who march today will have blood on their hands'. That's returned to bite him on the ass," he said.

Sir Elton compared his place in British culture with that of the Queen Mother's. He said: "People come to me and I'm a bit like the Queen Mother. I never get those problems. I don't know what it is with me, people treat me very reverently. Referring to his "wedding" to long-term partner David Furnish, he said: "It was the same when Dave and I had our civil union - I was expecting the odd flour bomb and there wasn't. "Dave and I as a couple seem to be the acceptable face of gayness, and that's great."

He pledged to continue to campaign for gay rights saying: "I'm going to fight for them whether I do it silently behind the scenes or so vocally that I get locked up. "I can't just sit back; it's not in my nature any more. I'm nearly 60-years-old after all. I can't sit back and blindly ignore it and I won't."


When people tell you that homosexuals are harmless and we should just leave them alone, remember that many homosexuals want to see religion wiped off the face of the earth, and secular progressives in Western culture are helping them in that endeavor.

When people tell you that homosexuals are marginalized, look at who is marching with them: When Nancy Met Harry

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, November 12, 2006 at 04:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBack (2)

Saturday, November 11, 2006
More Liturgical Video: Arrogant, Anti-Christian Atheist, Richard Dawkins, Questions Fallen Evangelical Minister, Ted Haggard

This video clip is interesting on many levels. It was made before Ted Haggard was publicly humiliated by a methamphetamine-dealing, homosexual prostitute, and provides something of a window into who he was before his fall. (I had never heard of him before the scandal.)

The video can also be seen here: Richard Dawkins Questions Evangelical Pastor

It's interesting to listen to Haggard try to defend Christianity. Sometimes he's right on the money. Dawkins certainly doesn't come off well, even though this video is from his perspective.

Now let's examine the liturgy presented in the video clip:

I was struck by how the liturgies represented in this video resemble the direction Catholic liturgies all over Orange County (and Los Angeles, and San Diego, and probably elsewhere) have been heading for the past few decades.

I believe that more progressive bishops in the United States see Protestant/Evangelical mega-churches like this one as a model for Catholicism (with the possible exception of the tendency towards conservatism and biblically-based Christian moral doctrine). Note how Haggard stresses having things "in the round". Note how the music resembles music played at Catholic liturgies.

If you don't believe that Catholic liturgists who think themselves cutting edge are cribbing from the Evangelicals, check out this video: The 2006 Los Angeles archdiocesan Religious Education Congress, Closing Liturgy

(You may need to download the required media players to view the clips.)

As a side note on poor Ted Haggard (please pray for him), apparently, Mr. Haggard harbored some anti-Catholic prejudices, as is evidenced in this story from Catholic News Service: Catholic filmmaker finds suspicion about her faith among evangelicals

Here's the relevant section of the article:

"My one disturbing encounter was at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs (Colo.) with Pastor Ted Haggard," head of the National Association of Evangelicals, who is "the senior minister of the church," Ewing said.
"I was in the service, and we had three cameras rolling, and there were 3,000 people in the church, and my cameraman was on the stage shooting him, and Pastor Ted started teasing the cameraman: 'Where are you from? England? Do you go to church?'" she recounted.

When the cameraman told Rev. Haggard that he goes to church when he's in England, the minister said, "So you're in the Church of England." The cameraman replied, "No, I'm Catholic," according to Ewing. "Pastor Ted turned to the congregation – and I have this on tape – in a very mocking tone, he said, 'Oh, we l-o-o-o-ve the Catholics, don't we?' and people started laughing.

"Why would he whack another religion?" she asked. "There was a disparaging way about how everyone reacted. As the leader of the National Association of Evangelicals, he is a representative of 30 million people and a religiously respected person in the movement. For him to joke like that, I was pretty alarmed."


Sad.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, November 11, 2006 at 02:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBack (0)
Orange Diocese Halloween Mass: Listen To The Music

A more detailed look at the initial video of the Catholic Halloween Mass (which shows only the Saturday vigil Mass) shows more ad libbing from the priest, other liturgical abuses, and gives a good sense of the banal music that is played at Masses throughout Orange County (throughout the Mass). Most Orange County Catholic parishes may claim they don't dress up for Halloween at Mass, but when it comes to dreadful music like this, most Orange County parishes provide exactly the same type of ugly, droning, mind-numbing, soul-sucking, quasi-rock and roll music at Mass.

This footage can also be viewed on YouTube: Catholic Halloween Mass

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, November 11, 2006 at 01:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBack (0)

Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Now On YouTube: Bishop Tod Brown Refuses To Give Holy Communion To A Kneeling Woman

This video was first widely seen through The Cafeteria Is Closed blog under title: Mean Tod Brown

It may be productive to share it again here, as some people may not have seen it before.

Here is the description of the event as provided by the kneeling woman:

I was sitting on the side of the Church, 3rd row, where Bishop Tod Brown distributed the Holy Eucharist, (in the video, I am the woman with short brown hair and glasses, wearing a black sweater and long white skirt sitting on the opposite side (from the camera) of the aisle in the center of the church) and upon approaching the Bishop to receive, I genuflected, out of reverence for the Sacred Species and remained on one knee to receive the Blessed Sacrament. Bishop Brown refused to give me Holy Communion. Bishop Brown said, “You need to stand up”.
I was in shock and didn’t move or respond. He then reached out and took hold of my folded hands, attempting to physically pull me to a standing position, and said more sternly, “You need to stand.”

I looked up and whispered, quietly and respectfully, “Please, bishop”, and he then grabbed my arm, and pulled me, as though to physically pull me up to a standing position (although obscured, you can see where he bends down and extends his right arm to grab mine) as he stated more loudly, “Get up”.

Still on one knee, I then asked very quietly and with genuine ignorance, “Why?”

As he stood up straight he responded, very loudly and sternly, “Because THAT’S the way we receive communion. Now, GET UP, you’re causing a scene.’


You can also see the video here: Bishop Tod Brown Refuses Holy Communion To A Kneeling Woman

The event is also described in the Open Letter to Tod Brown, Bishop of Orange

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, November 08, 2006 at 05:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (102) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, November 07, 2006
The Sacrilegious Halloween Mass: A Cartoon Commentary

Andrzej has submitted yet another excellent cartoon. This time, it's a commentary on the Halloween Masses in Bishop Tod Brown's Diocese of Orange, California.

See also:

Devils Distributing Communion: Bishop Tod Brown's Kind Of Diversity

The Blasphemous Halloween Masses: More Footage

Roman Catholic Blog: Humor Archives

Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, November 07, 2006 at 04:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Monday, November 06, 2006
The Blasphemous Halloween Masses: More Footage

This version of the footage contains extra material that is even more appalling than the previously available footage!

If you have trouble seeing the footage here using your browser, you can also see this footage directly on YouTube here: Halloween Mass

This new footage includes:

Footage of liturgical abuses, such as the use of inappropriate vessels for the Holy Eucharist.

Footage of Fr. Fred sitting down, while the extraordinary minister of the Eucharist dressed as a devil continues distributing the hosts and getting more herself from the altar.

A witch singing the Responsorial Psalm.

Parts of the homily (where Fr. Fred is describing past costumes the priest has worn), as well as Fr. Fred's admission that someone dressed as a devil was an extraordinary minister at the previous Mass. Fr. Fred exclaimed, "Only at Corpus Christi does the Devil himself become a Eucharistic Minister...you knew we were twisted!"

Fr. Fred is seen introducing the Lord's Prayer by saying: "As goblins and ghouls, we raise one voice: Our Father, who art in heaven..."

There is also footage of Fr. Fred dancing with a witch while he (Fr. Fred) is dressed as Barney (during the costume procession before the end of the Mass).

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, November 06, 2006 at 08:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (48) | TrackBack (1)
Sacrilegeous Halloween Mass: The Video
There is a five minute video clip of this Mass available through a link at Concerned Roman Catholics of America - the people who set up the donation fund for Fr. Mackin at St. Mary's by the Sea.

The link is in the second post on their homepage.

The video makes things clear.

Post your thoughts after watching.

Posted by Thomistic on Monday, November 06, 2006 at 04:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0)

Saturday, November 04, 2006
Devils Distributing Communion: Bishop Tod Brown's Kind Of Diversity
The Cafeteria Is Closed had a post about the Halloween Mass at the "Catholic-Christian community" of Corpus Christi in Aliso Viejo, in the Diocese of Orange, California.

Here is the advertisement for this year's Mass (taken from his parish bulletin):

Let your inner child come out to play… For those newly arrived at Corpus Christi since last October 31st you may not be aware of our most wonderful celebration of Halloween on the weekend PRIOR to October 31st…which this year will be NEXT weekend, October 28-29. In anticipation of All Hallows Eve parishioners are invited to come to Mass in costume (yep…that means adults AND kids). In addition, families/individuals are invited to carve a family Fred-O’Lantern (related to Jack but a lot more fun) for placement around the altar. Special treats (and very few tricks) will be available to the young and young at heart at all the Masses. In addition, let the wondering and guessing begin as to who or what FKB (Fred K. Bailey, the pastor) will become at the end of Mass; final clue: I love you, you love me. While some church communities scare their members with silly talk of Halloween being devil worship and other such nonsense, we Catholic-Christians understand that All Hallows Eve is the EVE of All Saint’s Day, an autumn celebration that honors our spiritual heritage. Secure in our knowledge of Jesus’ resurrection we are able to poke fun at the things that used to scare us and see them for the empty threats they always were. Our God is not threatened by carved vegetables; rather, he delights in a parish family that comes together in worship, fun and frolic.
Here are pictures from some of this year's Masses:









Update: Here's a visual take (from Andrzej) on the "It's the Great Pumpkin, Bishop Brown" Masses in Aliso Viejo with Satan giving out Communion:



Here is the latest flyer from Restore The Sacred, a group of Catholics working for the restoration of the sacred in Orange County:

Front and Back (You will need Microsoft Word to open the documents.)

Here is an article about Fr. Fred Bailey where he mentions a previous Halloween Mass: It's Just A Pumpkin, Los Angeles Lay Catholic Mission, January 2001

As many of you may know, Bishop Tod Brown has forbidden kneeling after the Agnus Dei in his diocese, and withdrawn permission for the continued celebration of the Tridentine Mass at St. Mary's by the Sea parish (in Huntington Beach, CA), in the name of unity, arbitrarily forcing the faithful to travel an extra 28 miles across the county to attend an indult Tridentine Mass.

This decision was made by Bishop Brown despite hundreds of letters and 1,200 signatures on a petition, and to the present day, the Tridentine Mass remains forbidden at St. Mary's by the Sea, forcing devotees to drive to the overcrowded Serra Chapel at the Mission San Juan Capistrano, where it is still officially sanctioned. In the Diocese of Orange, there is now one remaining indult Mass location, serving a diocese of over 1,044,191 Catholics in a county of 2,760,948 people. The Tridentine Mass at that location is only offered at 8:00 A.M. on Sundays and non-transferred Holy Days, is attended by 300+ persons every Sunday, and 450+ on the first Sunday of every month. The Serra Chapel is designed to hold approximately 120 persons. Many of these people drive from as far as 50 miles away. The Mass is at 8:00 AM, and they should plan to arrive up to 45 minutes early if they plan to get a seat!

Parishioners at St. Mary's by the Sea who have continued to kneel after the Agnus Dei as most Catholics throughout this country have done for over thirty years (and continue to do to this day) were harassed, accused of serious disobedience, and even mortal sin for continuing to kneel. People were banished from the parish council and barred from parish service and/or membership in parish centered groups like the Legion of Mary. The director of the altar boys was fired. Altar boys were dismissed. Elderly women were brought to tears by Fr. Martin Tran, who insisted upon singling out these kneeling parishioners and pressuring them to violate their consciences refusing to accept any compromise over Bishop Brown's policy of strictly regulating posture at Mass (a policy that, truth be told, was intent on breaking St. Mary's by the Sea parish of the last vestiges of traditional Catholicism that remained since Bishop Brown began "updating" the parish after the retirement of Rev. Daniel Johnson). Eventually, Fr. Tran sent a letter affecting something near sixty Catholics in the parish; inviting them to leave the parish, and the Diocese of Orange.

All of Fr. Martin Tran's actions were done with Bishop Brown's full support and approbation, because Bishop Brown is extremely serious about respecting the sacred liturgy. He will allow Catholics to hear painful words that accuse them of mortal sin, and even banish Catholics from their parish and their diocese, if they do not respect the sacred liturgy and adhere to the liturgical laws of the Church and/or the norms he sets himself for his own diocese.

Many parishioners at St. Mary's by the Sea felt that Bishop Brown's crackdown on St. Mary's by the Sea appeared to evidence a calloused disregard, and even a singular loathing, for the traditional Catholics at St. Mary's by the Sea, since there have been no such crackdowns on other liturgical aberrations in the diocese that are far more egregious than kneeling in adoration of the Real Presence of Our Lord in the Blessed Sacrament after the Agnus Dei.

Case in point: Fr. Fred Bailey's Annual Halloween Masses.

Disrespectful is too mild a word for a Mass with extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist and choir members who are dressed as demons and an altar surrounded by carved pumpkins named in honor of the pastor's ego.

Given Bishop Brown's professed desire to ensure that the sacred liturgy is not profaned by anomalies that are outside of liturgical law, it will be interesting to see how he handles the situation with Fr. Fred Bailey, a pastor Bishop Brown installed, whose eccentricities are well known throughout the diocese.

Will Fr. Fred be allowed to continue these practices? Will the extraordinary ministers and choir members be publicly accused of disobedience and serious, mortal sin, and barred from parish service? Or are Bishop Brown's selective liturgical enforcements only aimed at stamping out traditional piety, as many have suspected all along?

If you are unfamiliar with Bishop Brown, you might want to read the Open Letter to Tod Brown, Bishop of Orange, Vocations director under fire in California, and red through the archives of Roman Catholic Blog.



Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Saturday, November 04, 2006 at 09:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (87) | TrackBack (1)

Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Poll: Nearly Half Of Americans Uncertain God Exists
According to a recent poll, nearly half of Americans aren't sure if God exists.

Here's the story: Nearly half of Americans uncertain God exists: poll

I have to say that I'm not surprised. It certainly explains how John Kerry got nearly half of the votes in the last presidential election. (Bush got 51% of the popular vote. 62,040,606 people voted for George Bush. John Kerry got 48%. 59,028,109 people voted for John Kerry. Ralph Nader got 1% of the vote from 411,304 people.)

Recently, there was a poll that claimed that the culture war is overblown and that most Americans are not polarized. The mainstream media has long been telling us that most of America is "moderate" and that although demagogues on the left and the right attempt to drive wedges and cause rifts, we are all reasonable enough to be in the middle, bland and boring, sitting right on the fence, and not overly concerned about hot-button issues. (This is the same mainstream media that has been telling us (with a straight face) that their political coverage is completely objective and without any particular bias.)

Yet there is a culture war, in America, and woven throughout the tapestry of human history. There is a clash between the forces of good and evil. St. Augustine wrote about it in his famous work: The City of God.

It is very sad that something very near half of America is confused about whether or not God exists. Perhaps reflection on the five ways to demonstrate the existence of God will be of some benefit: Whether God exists?

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Wednesday, November 01, 2006 at 09:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Marriage Is Between One Man & One Woman


Posted by Thomistic on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 at 03:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Sunday, October 29, 2006
Bishop Tod Brown: More Defiance In Orange County?
The Cafeteria is Closed is reporting that Orange County, California bishop, Tod David Brown, has permitted his chancery to issue this directive from Lesa Truxaw, the Orange diocese's director of worship, to all priests and deacons in the Diocese of Orange, letting them know they should ignore the new directives from Rome with respect to the purification of vessels (rescinding the controversial, temporary permission for lay persons to purify the sacred vessels after the distribution of Holy Communion) until the U.S. Bishops meet to discuss the "new" norms. The need for the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops to discuss the implementation of the Holy See's new directive is somewhat mystifying. Some analysis of Bishop Brown's latest chess move is in order.

Here is Gerald Augustinus' blog entry: Diocese of Orange Memo on purification

Note: Gerald erroneously (but with the best of intentions) reported that the Diocese of Orange is: "in lockstep with Mahony's Los Angeles (it's part of the archdiocese)". That is not entirely accurate. While it is true that Bishop Brown's policies are often in lockstep with those of Cardinal Mahony, the Diocese of Orange is a separate entity. According to the history section of the official Diocese of Orange website: "On June 18, 1976, His Holiness Pope Paul VI established the Diocese of Orange, encompassing 782 square mile [sic] along 42 miles of Southern California coastline." On June 16th of that year, Cardinal Timothy Manning installed Los Angeles Auxiliary Bishop William Johnson as the first Bishop of Orange at Holy Family Cathedral.

The Diocese of Orange website continues, saying:

The Most Reverend William R. Johnson was installed as First Bishop of Orange and served his flock during the formative years of the diocese until his death on July 28, 1986. Auxiliary Bishop John T. Steinbock served as Apostolic Administrator until February 24, 1987, when the Most Reverend Norman F. McFarland was installed Second Bishop of Orange. On September 3, 1998 Bishop Tod D. Brown was installed as Third Bishop of Orange, upon the retirement of Bishop McFarland.
When the Diocese was first established, there were 42 parishes and 179 Priests serving 330,000 Orange County Catholics. Today, 25 years later, there are 55 diocesan parishes and 289 Priests serving 1,044,191 Catholics in the county of 2,760,948 people.


Although the territory of the Diocese of Orange was once part of the Los Angeles Archdiocese, it is now a separate diocese. Bishop Tod Brown is not an auxiliary bishop for the Archdiocese of Los Angels (nor were his predecessors). The office of Bishop of Orange is a separate see, independent of the authority of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.

However, it might be helpful to give some perspective on the history of Cardinal Mahony's efforts to influence policy in the Diocese of Orange.

As Jeff Nihill reported in the July 20, 2000 article, in the national Catholic weekly newspaper, The Wanderer, titled, "Tod Brown, Bishop of Orange: A Two Year Retrospective":

Bishop Tod D. Brown was installed as the third Bishop of Orange in the Diocese's Mother Church, Holy Family Cathedral, on September 3, 1998. When he arrived, little was known locally about Brown, other than that he was a friend and former classmate of Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony and had served for nine years as Bishop of Boise, Idaho. This relationship led many conservatives to fear that Brown was a staunch liberal, and, after nearly two years at the helm in Orange, this has proven true. Since his arrival, Brown has moved the diocesan administration steadily leftward, and has turned Orange into little more than an extension of the Los Angeles Archdiocese, responsive to the directives of Cardinal Mahony.
Norman McFarland, Brown's predecessor, served as Bishop of Orange for 11 years. He was a competent, able administrator, widely known for his financial acumen. Although his manner could be gruff and demanding, and one could easily disagree with his decisions, he was genuine and straightforward, and widely respected among the clergy and laity.

McFarland was solidly orthodox and well educated in the Catholic faith. However, McFarland's orthodoxy was frequently not shared by members of his chancery staff, nor by many of his priests and parish staffs. While he did ordain some pious, orthodox young men to the priesthood, he did little to change the far-left makeup of the religious education establishment in the diocese, intervening only in cases of the most overt heresy.

Unfortunately, such intervention was often ineffective. Should an abuse arise, McFarland might contact the offending party privately, and order it to cease. The person would ordinarily be left in his position of authority; someone who had no intention, despite assurances to the contrary, of being orthodox. Furthermore, McFarland would make no public statement to reassure the scandalized "layman in the pew" that the abuse had been corrected.

To the delight of many in Orange, McFarland and Cardinal Mahony had long shared a mutual dislike for each other, not only on philosophical grounds, but also because of the Cardinal's repeated attempts to meddle in the affairs of Orange.

With the appointment of Brown, however, such meddling has become commonplace. Brown is very much a different kind of bishop from McFarland. He is very much more the politician, quite pleasant and charming socially, and reserved and diplomatic in his public statements. However, in nearly two years as Bishop of Orange, he has yet to demonstrate, either in his writing or preaching, any depth of understanding of the Catholic faith.


Later in the article, Mr. Nihill reported:

In yet another indication of his obsequious relationship with Cardinal Mahony, Bishop Brown closed the Diocese of Orange's 24-year-old newspaper, the Bulletin, and is replacing it with a publication of the Tidings Corporation, which produces the L.A. Archdiocese's weekly newspaper, The Tidings. Mahony ordered the move to improve The Tidings' sagging circulation, which has today fallen to around 30,000 from a one-time high of 150,000.
Due in part to its promotion of a liberal political agenda with ideas contrary to the Catholic faith, the publication has alienated many faithful priests and lay persons. Additionally, the watered-down Catholicism of the L.A. Archdiocese has made the faith irrelevant to the lives of many Catholics, who, therefore, have no interest in the Archdiocesan newspaper. Considering the enormous sums of money the Archdiocese has spent to keep its newspaper afloat, its continuing rejection by rank-and-file Catholics has vexed Mahony and The Tidings' abrasive editor, recently appointed the Archdiocese's Director of Communications, Tod Tamberg.


So, you see, Cardinal Mahony has no authority over Bishop Tod Brown, they are simply the best of friends, and cut from the same theological cloth.

As for Lesa Truxaw's directive to the ordained ministers (priests and deacons) of the Diocese of Orange, several things come to mind:

First, why is a lay woman the Orange diocese's director of worship? Wouldn't a priest be more appropriate for such a position? Apparently, such is not the case in Tod Brown's diocese.

As Mr. Nihill noted in his article:

Brown also shares the political correctness typically found among members of the mainstream media and college professors. For example, his first high profile diocesan appointment was that of Sister Katherine Gray--a Sister of St. Joseph of Orange, the diocese's largest religious community which is rife with liberalism and rapidly dying out--as chancellor, a role traditionally held by a priest (female chancellors are the "in thing" among liberal bishops).
Second, why does the U.S. Conference of Catholic bishops need to meet in order to implement a directive from the Holy See rescinding the indult allowing lay persons to purify the sacred vessels after the distribution of Holy Communion? (For background details, see: Extraordinary ministers of Eucharist barred from purifying vessels)

National espiscopal conferences are not part of the intrinsic structure of the Church, but rather an added (and frequently unnecessary) layer of bureaucracy. (For the official position of the Church on national bishops' conferences, see: Apostolos Suos) Sometimes, it can be helpful to have all of the bishops in a given country work towards uniformity within that country, but in reality, each diocese answers directly to the Holy See (and its various offices) and needn't look to or follow the directives of any intermediary body.

To put things plainly, adopting a "wait and see what the U.S. bishops say" policy seems, at best, a ploy to stall for time and end run the clear and expressed wishes of the Holy Father on this matter. At worst, it would seem to imply that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (or at least some of its members) want to create the impression that they, and not the Holy See, are the final authority on liturgical matters in the United States.

This April 16, 1999, John Allen article on (then) Cardinal Ratzinger from the ultra-liberal, dissent friendly, National Catholic Reporter reveals the tension between national bishops' conferences and the Holy See: The Vatican’s enforcer

Others have spotted politics in the evolution of Ratzinger’s own theological positions. In 1965, for example, Ratzinger in a Concilium article called national episcopal conferences “the best means of concrete plurality in unity,” arguing that they’re rooted in the ancient church. As prefect, however, Ratzinger has insisted that episcopal conferences have no such status; a bishop can teach in his own diocese and all the bishops together can teach in a council, but there’s nothing in between. That was the thrust of the recent papal document Apostolos Suos.
Why the shift? NCR’s late Vatican affairs correspondent Peter Hebblethwaite suggested in 1986 that it’s an instance of Ratzinger using theology ideologically. It’s much easier to cow an individual bishop than a strong conference, so by reducing the power of conferences, Ratzinger boosts his own.


Finally, you may notice that Lesa Truxaw emphasizes that reception of Holy Communion "under both signs is a "more complete" sign of the sacrament's meaning." This is accurate, but misleading. Here is what Catholic News Service (the official news organ of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops) reported about Cardinal Arinze's clarification in the letter rescinding the controversial, temporary indult allowing lay persons to purify the sacred vessels after the reception of Holy Communion:

Although receiving Communion under both kinds is a "more complete" sign of the sacrament's meaning, Cardinal Arinze said, "Christ is fully present under each of the species."
"Communion under the species of the bread alone, as a consequence, makes it possible to receive all the fruit of eucharistic grace," he added.

Another "legitimate option" when "the high number of communicants may render it inadvisable for everyone to drink from the chalice" is intinction -- the practice of dipping the consecrated host into the consecrated wine -- "with reception on the tongue always and everywhere," the cardinal's letter said.


Not a few people have long viewed the movement to encourage the necessity of receiving Holy Communion under both species for the laity as an attempt to artificially multiply the "need" for extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist in an effort to end run this 1997 directive from the Holy See:
On Certain Questions Regarding The Collaboration Of The Non-Ordained Faithful In The Sacred Ministry Of Priest, which stated (in Article Eight):

§ 1. The canonical discipline concerning extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion must be correctly applied so as to avoid generating confusion. The same discipline establishes that the ordinary minister of Holy Communion is the Bishop, the Priest and the the Deacon.(96) Extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion are those instituted as acolytes and the faithful so deputed in accordance with Canon 230, § 3.(97)
A non-ordained member of the faithful, in cases of true necessity, may be deputed by the diocesan bishop, using the appropriate form of blessing for these situation, to act as an extraordinary minister to distribute Holy Communion outside of liturgical celebrations ad actum vel ad tempus or for a more stable period. In exceptional cases or in un foreseen circumstances, the priest presiding at the liturgy may authorize such ad actum.(98)

§ 2. Extraordinary ministers may distribute Holy Communion at eucharistic celebrations only when there are no ordained ministers present or when those ordained ministers present at a liturgical celebration are truly unable to distribute Holy Communion.(99) They may also exercise this function at eucharistic celebrations where there are particularly large numbers of the faithful and which would be excessively prolonged because of an insufficient number of ordained ministers to distribute Holy Communion. (100)

This function is supplementary and extraordinary (101) and must be exercised in accordance with the norm of law. It is thus useful for the diocesan bishop to issue particular norms concerning extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion which, in complete harmony with the universal law of the Church, should regulate the exercise of this function in his diocese. Such norms should provide, amongst other things, for matters such as the instruction in eucharistic doctrine of those chosen to be extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion, the meaning of the service they provide, the rubrics to be observed, the reverence to be shown for such an august Sacrament and instruction concerning the discipline on admission to Holy Communion.

To avoid creating confusion, certain practices are to be avoided and eliminated where such have emerged in particular Churches:

— extraordinary ministers receiving Holy Communion apart from the other faithful as though concelebrants;

— association with the renewal of promises made by priests at the Chrism Mass on Holy Thursday, as well as other categories of faithful who renew religious vows or receive a mandate as extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion;

— the habitual use of extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion at Mass thus arbitrarily extending the concept of "a great number of the faithful".


Incidentally, the same document also said (at the end of Article One):

It is unlawful for the non-ordained faithful to assume titles such as "pastor", "chaplain", "coordinator", " moderator" or other such similar titles which can confuse their role and that of the Pastor, who is always a Bishop or Priest.
Be sure to check your parish bulletin to see how well that directive has been implemented. Perhaps we should ask Lesa Truxaw, the director of the Office of Worship, about that?

For more details on Bishop Tod Brown's leadership, be sure to check out the Open Letter to Tod Brown, Bishop of Orange, Vocations director under fire in California, and the archives of Roman Catholic Blog.

Any thoughts?

Posted by Thomistic on Sunday, October 29, 2006 at 01:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (25) | TrackBack (0)

Tuesday, October 24, 2006
World Series Of Catholic Theologians
This looks interesting: The World Series Of Catholic Theologians!

I've missed out on the Conference Semifinals, but if you'd like to vote in the Conference Finals, make sure to cast your vote before balloting closes (I couldn't see on the blog when that is exactly -- but no sense in tarrying!).

The contenders are Joseph Ratzinger v. Hans Urs von Balthasar in Conference Augustine, and Henri de Lubac v. John Henry Newman in Conference Aquinas.

Posted by Maximus on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 at 12:12 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Recent Posts
Vatican Document On Evangelization Expected Soon
"Golden Compass" Disappoints At The Box Office
Jimmy Akin On Mitt Romney's Speech: Not Impressed
God Save San Francisco
Mitt Romney's Faith In America Speech
Fred Thompson: Serious
So Many Things, So Little Time: A Post On Many Things
Contempt Charges Against Diocese of Orange Bishop, Tod David Brown, Dropped
Pope Benedict XVI's Encyclical: Spe Salvi ("In hope we were saved")
Ann Coulter & Rush Limbaugh Offer Some Constructive Criticism
Recent Comments
Connie on "Golden Compass" Disappoints At The Box Office
Dwight on Ron Paul Supports Medical Marijuana
Dwight on Ron Paul Supports Medical Marijuana
Joe on "Golden Compass" Disappoints At The Box Office
ASimpleSinner on So Many Things, So Little Time: A Post On Many Things
ASimpleSinner on "Golden Compass" Disappoints At The Box Office
Chuck Foley on So Many Things, So Little Time: A Post On Many Things
Rarakiroa on "Golden Compass" Disappoints At The Box Office
Kathy 2169 on Bishop Tod Brown Updates - Things Are Escalating
anne on "Golden Compass" Disappoints At The Box Office
Categories
Apostolic Visitation
Catholic Academia
Catholic Blogosphere
Catholic Europe
Catholic Music
Catholicism and Islam
Catholicism and Judaism
Catholicism in the Public Square
Feminist Fringe
Heretics and Heterodoxy
Humor
Islam and the Church
Monsignor John Urell
Papabili
Pope Benedict XVI
Pope John Paul II
Protestantism
The Anti-Christian Fringe
The Blessed Virgin
The Church in America
The Church in the Media
The Church Militant
The Clergy
The Clergy and Religious
The Conclave
The Dictatorship of Relativism
The Family
The Holy Sacrifice Of The Mass
The Liturgy
The Magisterium
The Religious
The Sacraments
The Traditional Mass
The Unborn
Theology
This Vale Of Tears
Vocations
Catholic Media
Catholic Media Coalition
www.chiesa
CathNews
Catholic World News (CWN)
Catholic News Agency
Eternal Word Television Network
Our Sunday Visitor
America Magazine
National Catholic Reporter
National Catholic Register
Catholic Movements
Opus Dei
Path To Rome
The Continuity Movement
Regnum Christi
Miles Jesu
Pope Benedict XVI Homilies & Statements
Inaugural Mass of His Holiness Benedict XVI
Catholic Resources
Pope Chart - All 264 Popes
Catholic.net
Catholic Online
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA
Catholic-Hierarchy
Human Life International
Vatican Resources
Cardinal Electors Over 80 (alphabetical)
List of Cardinal Electors (alphabetical)
College of Cardinals Bios
Codex of Catholic Blogs
"Open wide the doors to Christ!"
A Saintly Salmagundi
A Son becomes a Father
A View From The Pew
Ad Altare Dei
Ad Limina Apostolorum
Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam
Adjutorium Nostrum + In Nomine Domini
Against The Grain
Always Jason
Amy Welborn
An Examined Life
Angry Twins
Anne Elliot
Annunciations
Apologia
Beef on Weck Blog: A Bodacious Bit of Blarney
Bettnet - Musings from Domenico Bettinelli, Jr.
Between Heaven and Hell
Blog Retrofuturistic
Blogodoxy - A Blog Of Life In The Ancient Christian Faith
Caritate Dei
Catholic Apologetics of America
Catholic Blogic
Catholic Fire
Catholic Light
Catholic Ragemonkey
CatholicLand!
CatholicNews.org
Catholicae Testudines
Catholics for Democracy
Catholics in the Public Square
Church of the Masses
Confessions of a Recovering Choir Director
Credibility
Crux News (Michael Rose)
Dappled Things
De Fidei Oboedientia
Defenders of the Catholic Faith - Steve's Blog
Deo Gratias
Diary of a Suburban Priest
Diary of a Suburban Priest
Discernment Group
Disputations
El Camino Real
Fiat: Responding to God's Call
Flos Carmeli
Fructus Ventris
GetReligion
Happy Catholic
Ignatius Insight Scoop
In Light of the Law
In Pectore
Irish Elk
JimmyAkin.org
Kicking Over My Traces
Laudem Gloriae
Lex Communis
Mark Shea - Catholic and Enjoying It!
Mercy and Mary - Thoughts from a Marian of the Immaculate Conception
Mere Catholics
Minute Particulars
Mirror of Justice
Musings of an Expagan
Musum Pontificalis
Non Omnis Moriar
Not So Quiet Catholic Corner
Notes to Myself...
OC Chronicle
One Clear Call
One Pilgrim's Walk :
Our Word and Welcome to It
PPK Blog (Priest, Prophet, King)
Papabile
Pontifications
Pope Benedict XVI Blog
Powerblog
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Quenta Nârwenion
Questions and Answers
Quodlibeta
Recta Ratio
Relapsed Catholic
Rerum Novarum
Res et Rationes
Rome Diary (Fr. Richard John Neuhaus)
Rosa Mystica
Sancta Sanctis
Sarah plain and tall
Shrine of the Holy Whapping
Some Have Hats
Spero Forum
St Blog's Parish Hall
THE MATERNAL OPTIMIST
The Anchoress
The Cafeteria Is Closed
The Curt Jester
The Curt Jester
The Donegal Express
The Fez
The Inn at the End of the World
The Mighty Barrister
The New Pope Benedict XVI
The Paragraph Farmer
The Pope Blog: Conclave Edition
The Troglodyte
TheWorld...IMHO
Thoughts from the Right
Thrown Back
Times Against Humanity - O tempora, o mores!
Times Against Humanity - O tempora, o mores!
Trust the Truth - Integrity, Sincerity, and the Truth
Unam Sanctum
Vaticanisti
Verba Vitae Aeternae
Veritas
Video meliora, proboque; Deteriora sequor
Vivificat! A Catholic Blog of Commentary and Opinion
extreme Catholic
me autem minui
mycatholicblog
nunblog
open book
rogueclassicism
the CATHOLIC MONARCHIST
ut unum sint
vitaminb16
Apologetics

Scripture Catholic - Providing Scriptural Evidence for the Teachings of the Catholic Faith
WHY CATHOLIC?
Catholic Action Principles

Defenders of the Catholic Faith
Catholic Apologetics Network
Biblical Evidence for Catholicism
American Catholic Truth Society
Catholic Answers
Orthodox Blogs
Dr. John Mark Reynolds
Blogs From People We Wish Were Catholic
HughHewitt.com
Archives
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
More...
Subscribe to this blog's feed

Posted by VATICAN KINGDOM OF SATAN at 7:09 AM



0 comments: Post a Comment

Home
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom) Blog Archive▼ 2007 (1)
▼ December (1)
POPE BETTY XVI 666 QUEEN OF HOMOPHOBIA
About MeVATICAN KINGDOM OF SATAN
View my complete profile