It’s time to print your MPRP calendar and put it somewhere you’ll see it every day (fridge, nightstand, etc):
http://www.mprp-roc.org/mprp01-12March.html
Archive for February, 2012
Monthly Prayer Request for Priests – March
February 29th, 2012, Promulgated by Ben AndersonNY Dem pro-abortion “catholic” Congresswoman booed for supporting HHS attack
February 27th, 2012, Promulgated by Ben AndersonI attempted to embed this video but it’s not working, so you’ll have to follow this link to see it. Notice the Station of the Cross shirt on the first speaker. I believe he is Jim Havens, Director of Evangelization, at the Station of the Cross. Fr Z made mention of this incident as well.
On a related note, 92.9 FM Catholic Radio is coming to Rochester! If you like the work of the Station of the Cross, I’m sure they wouldn’t mind if you support the transition.
The Extraordinary Form (of Priestly Petulance)
February 27th, 2012, Promulgated by GenSometimes I wonder how and why some people loathe the Traditional Latin Mass with such vehemence. And then I read things like this. This priest from the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter might mean well, but his actions and words undoubtedly wound souls and turn countless others away from the beauty of the Extraordinary Form. The fellow actually equates singing at Mass with liturgical abuse! If only we had the luxury of complaining about singing congregants, rather than heretical she-priests and a lack-lustre bishop.
Evidently, this priest, as well-intentioned as he might be, would rather devote time to ostracizing his parishioners than foster a sense of active participation on their part. We mustn’t act like the Council didn’t happen – it said, quite explicitly, that Gregorian Chant is a treasure which must be opened up to and sung by the laity. Sacrosanctum Concillium clearly states in Chapter VI, “The Church acknowledges Gregorian chant as specially suited to the Roman liturgy: therefore, other things being equal, it should be given pride of place in liturgical services. Religious singing by the people is to be intelligently fostered so that in devotions and sacred exercises, as also during liturgical services, the voices of the faithful may ring out according to the norms and requirements of the rubrics.”
The following presentation of the matter, and its accompanying commentary, come from the Chant Cafe, penned by Jeffrey Tucker. A nod of the miter to him.
I never imagined that I would find a Catholic parish where the pastor actually discourages the people from singing. But here we have it happening at a parish that offer the extraordinary form exclusive. It strikes as almost as a caricature of traditionalism.
While there is no reason anyone cannot joyfully sing along in their pew in a subdued and harmonious fashion the Ordinary parts of the Mass, they must take care [in charity] not to project their voices over the choir [or noticeably above the rest of the congregation] and become a distraction for their pewmates or the ministers in the sanctuary, all trying to authentically pray the living liturgy unfolding before them – Eternity manifest in Time. The Entrance and Recessional Hymns are usually meant for the congregation properly, led by the choir.
Contrast with the Popes, as nicely presented by The Cross Reference:
Special efforts are to be made to restore the use of the Gregorian Chant by the people, so that the faithful may again take a more active part in the ecclesiastical offices, as was the case in ancient times. (Tra le sollecitudini, Pius X, 1903)
In order that the faithful may more actively participate in divine worship, let them be made once more to sing the Gregorian Chant, so far as it belongs to them to take part in it. It is most important that when the faithful assist at the sacred ceremonies, or when pious sodalities take part with the clergy in a procession, they should not be merely detached and silent spectators, but, filled with a deep sense of the beauty of the Liturgy, they should sing alternately with the clergy or the choir, as it is prescribed. If this is done, then it will no longer happen that the people either make no answer at all to the public prayers — whether in the language of the Liturgy or in the vernacular — or at best utter the responses in a low and subdued manner. (Divini Cultus, Pius XI, 1928)
Therefore, they are to be praised who, with the idea of getting the Christian people to take part more easily and more fruitfully in the Mass, strive to make them familiar with the “Roman Missal,” so that the faithful, united with the priest, may pray together in the very words and sentiments of the Church. They also are to be commended who strive to make the liturgy even in an external way a sacred act in which all who are present may share. This can be done [...] in high Masses when they answer the prayers of the minister of Jesus Christ and also sing the liturgical chant. (Mediator Dei, Pius XII, 1947)
It is the duty of all those to whom Christ the Lord has entrusted the task of guarding and dispensing the Church’s riches to preserve this precious treasure of Gregorian chant diligently and to impart it generously to the Christian people. [...] May it thus come about that the Christian people begin even on this earth to sing that song of praise it will sing forever in heaven. (Musicae Sacrae, Pius XII, 1955)
In solemn Mass there are three degrees of the participation of the faithful: a) First, the congregation can sing the liturgical responses. These are: Amen; Et cum spiritu tuo; Gloria tibi, Domine; Habemus ad Dominum; Dignum et justum est; Sed libera nos a malo; Deo gratias. Every effort must be made that the faithful of the entire world learn to sing these responses. b) Secondly, the congregation can sing the parts of the Ordinary of the Mass: Kyrie, eleison; Gloria in excelsis Deo; Credo; Sanctus-Benedictus; Agnus Dei. Every effort must be made that the faithful learn to sing these parts, particularly according to the simpler Gregorian melodies. But if they are unable to sing all these parts, there is no reason why they cannot sing the easier ones: Kyrie, eleison; Sanctus-Benedictus; Agnus Dei; the choir, then, can sing the Gloria, and Credo. In connection with this, the following Gregorian melodies, because of their simplicity, should be learned by the faithful throughout the world: the Kyrie, eleison; Sanctus-Benedictus; Agnus Dei of Mass XVI from the Roman Gradual; the Gloria in excelsis Deo, and Ite, missa est-Deo gratias of Mass XV; and either Credo I or Credo III. In this way it will be possible to achieve that most highly desirable goal of having the Christian faithful throughout the world manifest their common faith by active participation in the holy Sacrifice of the Mass, and by common and joyful song. c) Thirdly, if those present are well trained in Gregorian chant, they can sing the parts of the Proper of the Mass. This form of participation should be carried out particularly in religious congregations and seminaries. (De Musica Sacra, Sacred Congregation for Rites (during Pius XII), 1958)
Perhaps Fr. Parrinello ought to realize that, as a priest, he has a duty to minister to all of his congregation, and not just the boys’ club that occupies his choir loft.
Two Reassignments of Note
February 27th, 2012, Promulgated by GenOf all the upcoming staff changes the Diocese will see in this year’s shuffle, there are two particularly bright spots I want to highlight. 
Primarily, Sr. Joan Sobala, Pastoral Administrator of Our Lady of Lourdes/St. Anne in Rochester, will be retiring on the Feast of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist. Fr. Tyman will be replacing her as the head of the cluster, a move that can only help to improve the situation for these two churches. While Fr. Tyman’s orthodoxy is not particularly astounding, the fact is this: a priest will be in charge of the cluster. That’s the important thing. We have had reports of Sr. Joan showing up at hospital beds for her own version of the Last Rights, taking an unacceptable role in the baptizing of children, subverting the sacred duties of priests (Fr. Tyman, Fr. Lawlor, the late Fr. Lynch, etc. ad infinitem), and the scattering and alienation of her flock. I hesitate to say “her flock,” seeing as how she has no right to such unholy possession of the people of God. How many souls has she imperiled? How many vocations have been stifled? How many orthodox Catholics turned away from someone who gives such lip-service to “diversity” and “inclusivity”? On behalf of the Cleansing Fire staff, I extend to Sr. Joan a heartfelt congratulations. I hope you enjoy your retirement, when you can stand in the privacy of your own room and play priestess without endangering the souls of hundreds of families.
The second interesting appointment is that of Fr. Adam Ogorzaly to Mother of Sorrows, to replace Fr. Bradshaw who is retiring this summer. Fr. Adam has been a tremendous asset to St. Stanislaus in the past several years, warmly embracing the Latin Mass Community, engaging in tremendous community work, and ministering to the needs of a truly diverse parish. This man is a true asset to the Diocese, and I am extremely glad to see this being realized by those in charge. At Mother of Sorrows, I am confident that Fr. Adam will achieve only good things at Mother of Sorrows, for that is what we have seen in his tenure at St. Stanislaus. God bless him in this new pursuit.
Priest endorses Fortunate Families in parish bulletin
February 26th, 2012, Promulgated by Ben AndersonFr. Michael Bausch, proud supporter of Fortunate Families and a category #2 kind of Catholic, wrote glowingly about the organization in this Sunday’s bulletin at the Church of the Transfiguration in Pittsford, NY. Remember that this organization doesn’t simply provide counseling for parents of SSA children. They unabashedly oppose the Church’s teaching on homosexuality and work towards promoting the homosexual agenda.
Dear Friends,
Over the years I have had several parents come to me to sort through feelings and concerns relative to their son or daughter just having revealed to them that they are gay or lesbian. In almost every case parents tell me they love their child, but struggle with a myriad of emotions: loneliness, fear, confusion, and grief to name a few. Over time I have learned that these visits always require a listening heart. In almost all these situations I discover these parents, who are unable to articulate that love early in their journey, need other parents who love their gay kids to listen to them and to share their experience with them.We are very blessed to have the ministry of Fortunate Families (a national organization based in Rochester) which offers support resources that help Catholic parents deal with their emotions which range from tears to fears. I have spoken with parenst who have been part of support groups who express deep thanks and appereciation as they come to understand that their LGBT daugher and son is made in the image of God inherently as whole and holy as their stragight kids. They see God’s love revealed in them as they strive to love God and neighbor, as the person God made them to be, faithfully seeking God’s voice in their hearts, often in loving relationships and as loving parents.
When parents experience discriminatory words and actions of those who lack understanding, strong feelings such as frustration, anger and sometimes betrayal may arise. But because of their faith and love for their son or daughter they can very often turn those situations into a learning expereince for those who may have made the discriminatory remarks.
In my experience, parents who understand their LGBT loved ones, have a passionate commitment to justice for them, and these parents are more likely to be listened to because they are the faithful, heart and soul of our parishes, and they can make a difference. Their son or daughter maybe too tired to fight for a place at the table, but as parents fo the child they love they are willing to make sure the message God’s love is shared with other parents and with others who may need to understand that message.
I am certainly open to establishing a ministry for parenst with LGBT son or daughter. I realize people may feel awkward about addressing the topic head-on and so please be assured that if you approach me your questions and concerns will be dealt with full confidentiality.
My goal is two fold, first, to encourage and help parents to share their stories of love and faith and second to offer opportunities to collaborate with other individuals and groups who insist our loved ones be treated with dignity and equality. Please feel free to contact me or Fortunate Families at www.fortunatefamilies.com. I thank the people of Fortunate Families for their inspiration and assistance in writing this article.
…
In Peace and Courage,
Fr. Mike
My simple question to DOR leadership, Timothy Cardinal Dolan, and the Catholic Church at large is “why do you not seem to care that your Church, your faith, your religion, your fathers, your martyrs, and your flock, are continually mocked by priests who have removed themselves from full communion with the Catholic Church (or worse)?”
What about the “Pastoral Minister” title?
February 25th, 2012, Promulgated by Diane HarrisIf you haven’t yet caught up with http://spiritualpilgrim.dor.org/ you may not have seen the use of the title “Pastoral Minister” there. At least two women are given that title on the site. One is Kathy Lipfert from Auburn, and the other is Cris Wensel who is an employee of both St. Louis in Pittsford and Our Lady of the Lakes in Penn Yan, and has been since 2008. (Figure out the mileage on that one!) Wensel is one who pushed so hard for the wreck-ovation at St. Januarius, and who got low ratings in a parish-wide survey, but is still hanging on. (See the Zeal posts II, III, XV, XX, and XXI.)
Now is she the spokeswoman for Our Lady of the Lakes in evangelization too? The person who calls the Holy Spirit “she?” Interesting! But Fr. Ring defended her gender mis-use; not a surprise in DoR, is it? Well on the video she identifies herself as a “pastoral associate in the Diocese of Rochester.”
So, where does the term “Pastoral Minister” come from? Where does it fit with Pastoral Associate, Pastoral Administrator and Pastor? Lipfert’s title is enshrined in the Diocesan Directory; Wensel’s is not. But before the titles disappear from the website, here is the evidence:
If you play the Wensel video, you will hear her identify herself as pastoral associate, but how can we help but wonder what is around the corner? Why is DoR using these titles now? Not surprisingly, the difficult time Wensel has had in OLOL is at least partly reflected in her choice of words that the Catholic Church is “grounded in community” and it can be a “little rough, a little frustrating, a little difficult”. Oh, my — what evangelization is THAT! If I weren’t Catholic, would I want to run right out and convert? Not likely. Her message is to “try out one of our parishes.” And although she is listed for Yates County, she doesn’t mention OLOL churches. Check it out at: http://spiritualpilgrim.dor.org/tasks/sites/sa/assets/File/Cris%20Wensel%20video.mov
Late Emendation:
When I first posted, I’d hoped for some input and reaction to the spritual pilgrim program, and was wondering if this is a good way to go about evangelization? However, in the first 10 responses there has been much banter on the comment I’d made about Cris Wensel’s calling the Holy Spirit “she,” and it felt to me like “deja vu all over again” as Yogi Berra would say. Back in Our Lady of the Lakes this was precisely the question I had called Cris on, and for which Fr. Ring defended her. He even used some writing by Scott Hahn to argue that Bishop Bruskewitz endorsed Cris’s language. As the Holy Spirit often and so fortuitously arranges, I actually had the opportunity to speak with Bishop Bruskewitz on the national EWTN call-in show, and here is his reply, soundly defeating the Wensel-Ring arguments, and also some of those arguments posted in the comments below.
Click on this link to hear the commentary with Bishop Bruskewitz:
St. Martin de Porres, Jensen Beach, FL
February 25th, 2012, Promulgated by Bernie
Copy, "Dispute on the Blessed Sacrament", Raphael ca. 1508, Stanza of the Signature, Popes' Palace, Vatican City
Click here for more information of the painting.
Relic Casket Style Tabernacle
Should politicians remain silent on politically irrelevant beliefs?
February 24th, 2012, Promulgated by Ben AndersonBefore I present the topic of discussion, I’d like to briefly outline some classes of issues currently being discussed in the presidential primary:
1) Issues that Catholics can legitimately disagree on. eg – health care policy, progressive tax rates, foreign policy, entitlement programs, economic policy. This isn’t the blog to discuss these issues and I’d ask commenters to stay away from them – not because they don’t matter, but because it isn’t the focus of this blog and there are plenty of other places to discuss these issues. Certainly our Catholic faith influences our positions on these topics, but there is wide range of opinions a Catholic might legitimately hold.
2) Issues in which all Catholics are obliged to support a particular position. I’ll break this down further into another 2 more sub-categories:
2a) Issues that are hot topics politically and that the POTUSA has significant influence over. eg abortion, marriage, and religious liberty.
2b) Issues that Catholics must believe, but that politicians don’t have the authority to directly influence citizens one way or the other as POTUSA. eg the Pope is the vicar of Christ, contraception is wrong, Satan exists and is actively at work in the world, Obama’s theology is junk, Mary was conceived without original sin.
Having broken that down, I’d like to hear your opinions on whether politicians should remain silent on issues in the above #2b category. In particular, I’d like to use the example of Rick Santorum. Whether or not you like his political views (#1 above), you’ve got to give him credit for his courage to be so vocal about his Catholic beliefs (#2a and #2b). What I find to be interesting is that there seems to be a good number of people who agree with him on issues in the #2b category, but wish that he remain silent publicly on those issues. I’ve seen people espousing this opinion all over the blogosphere and facebook. Here’s just 2 examples that I came across today from the National Review Online (a politically and socially conservative site):
Because he has phrased his socially conservative views in vivid terms, he is precisely the sort of candidate who will evoke a Pavlovian response from the press. Just as they were driven mad by Sarah Palin, they will be outraged by Rick Santorum. The campaign will be cluttered by the continual discovery of “controversial” Santorum quotes from the past three decades, and precious time will be lost as he explains, justifies, or withdraws his comments on women in the workforce, contraception, gay unions, Obama’s “theology” (by which he did not mean to question the president’s faith, something he’ll have to explain over and over), and so forth.
In fact, Santorum’s sanctimonious style might put off even many religious voters. His intense 2008 warning about “the Father of Lies, Satan” having his “sights on the United States of America . . . attacking the great institutions of America — using those great vices of pride, vanity and sensuality as the root to attack all of the strong plants that [have] so deeply rooted in the American tradition” is not the sort of language most preachers, to say nothing of political figures, employ today. American religion these days is heavy on forgiveness and light on sin. We’ve long since left Jonathan Edwards behind. Anything other than comic references to Satan are likely to give people the creeps.
…
the press has not had to invent controversial remarks by Santorum, who has supplied them himself. He has said that Satan is undermining America, in part by corrupting mainline Protestantism; that liberal versions of Christianity are distortions of the creed; that as president he would speak out against birth control, and that states should be free to prohibit it; and that John McCain “doesn’t have any” religious views.Some of his comments are indefensible, and even some of Santorum’s defensible assertions would have been better left to someone else — someone not seeking the presidency — to say. Santorum’s remarks about Senator McCain were unwise and uncharitable. Nor do we need political leaders to share their theological judgments about the various denominations that call themselves Christian. There is no good reason for a prospective president to pledge to lecture Americans about contraception.
…
The challenge before him is to marry his self-confidence to a more consistent exercise of discrimination and tact.If he does not heed this lesson, he risks doing damage to the causes he rightly holds dear. Already his inopportune remarks about contraception have lent an undeserved credibility to liberaldom’s claim that a Republican “war on contraception” rather than a Democratic attack on freedom is what underlies the debate over the Obama administration’s new regulations.
So, what do you think about #2b issues? What might be some general principles that a Catholic politician ought to follow? It seems obvious to me that a politician shouldn’t come out and call Evangelicalism heresy. That would be sure to lose an election. I happen to be of the opinion, though, that the topics mentioned in the above articles (contraception is morally wrong, satan exists and is doing dangerous work in our country, Obama’s theology is severely flawed, etc) are topics that a good Catholic politician ought to speak up about. It doesn’t mean they should go out of their way to make them front and center in their campaigns, but it also doesn’t mean they should remain silent on them their whole lives either. The MSM’s main power is not in their ability to slant stories, but in the ability to decide what is newsworthy. The fact that our current President endorsed infanticide is not news simply because the MSM doesn’t highlight it. The fact that Santorum said Satan exists at a Catholic college a few years ago, however, is scandalous to liberals and must be evidence that he’s a right-wing nut job and will become their talking points for several days. In my opinion, the counter attack to the socially liberal MSM isn’t to pander to them either by espousing the politically correct view or by remaining silent, but by doing exactly what Santorum has been doing. He isn’t the one making these issues front and center, but when they are brought up, he doesn’t back down. He gives educated, clear, and concise answers. Quite honestly, I find it refreshing that Santorum doesn’t back away from these issues and explains himself very well when asked about them. If the MSM chooses to tar and feather him and make him out to be an idiot, then so what? If they think that about him, then they think it about you. And wouldn’t you rather have it out there as a discussion point to defend than something buried down deep that people, in their own ignorance, hold against you? Truth is truth and shouldn’t be kept to ourselves. Sure, you’re not going to win everyone over, but you might win a few. And at least the people who aren’t convinced were presented with the truth. It’s amazing to me how many people out there have never heard the truth. This is sad and we are all to blame.
I also happen to believe that there is a spiritual dimension to every single thing we do. God rewards us when we stick up for Him. Sticking up for truth is sticking up for God. No, I’m not endorsing a health and wealth Gospel, but it is certainly a biblical principle that following God’s law produces benefits not only in the afterlife, but in the here and now. Obviously this isn’t a universal principle that can explain why bad things happen to good people and vice versa, but God does promise to stand by us and reward us if we stand up for Him (and He is the way, the TRUTH, and the life).
There’s a fitting anecdote about Hilaire Beloc:
During one campaign speech he was asked by a heckler if he was a “papist.” Retrieving his rosary from his pocket he responded, “Sir, so far as possible I hear Mass each day and I go to my knees and tell these beads each night. If that offends you, then I pray God may spare me the indignity of representing you in Parliament.” The crowd cheered and Belloc won the election.
Notice he didn’t say, “that’s a private matter and I wish not to discuss it”, or “how dare you ask me such a question? (Newt Gingrich style)”, but rather calmly and clearly confronted it head on.
So what do you think about all of this?
Be not deceived
February 22nd, 2012, Promulgated by Ben AndersonAnother guest post from James Likoudis
Note: by James Likoudis
The spread of homosexuality in American society and the moral sanction given sodomy is one of the most glaring manifestations of moral decay and decline instigated by the Sexual Revolution which can be traced back to the 1950′s which saw even Catholic clergy beginning to go soft on contraception, abortion, and homosexuality, and supporting the immoral Sex Education programs instigated by such secular humanist organizations as SIECUS (the Sex Information and Educational Council of the United States). The full impact of the Sexual Revolution on the Church itself would be seen in the Revolt of priests, religious, and lay people led by Rochester diocesan priest Charles E. Curran against Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae. The Diocese of Rochester itself would become nationally known as one of the leading liberal/modernist dioceses where important clerical and lay voices could be heard either subtly or blatantly opposing Catholic teaching on contraception and homosexuality. In this latter regard, the role played by Mr. and Mrs. Casey Lopata in subverting Catholic teaching on homosexuality is instructive. The following Review of their book “Fortunate Families: Catholic Families with Lesbian Daughters and Gay sons” (Trafford Publishing, Victoria, Canada, 2003) bore the favorable recommendation of their good friend and advisor, Sr. Kay Heverin, SSJ, Pastoral Associate in a diocesan parish. It will be recalled that for some years Casey Lopata and his wife co-directed the Rochester Diocese’s “Lesbian and Gay Ministry” office until they resigned their post on April 6, 2004.
Review
Chapter 7 of the book written by the Lopatas ostensibly “addresses church teaching in relation to homosexuality”. It distorts the Church’s teaching by invoking the “primacy of conscience” to justify engagement in homosexual activity and in excusing the gravity of homosexual acts committed by lesbians and gays. Dissenters from Catholic teaching who deny the intrinsic immorality of homosexual acts (such as the group “Dignity” and such “moral theologians” as Fr. Richard Peddicord, author of “Gay and Lesbian Rights”) and the confused comments of some Bishops are quoted in support of the Lopatas’ distortions of Catholic moral doctrine. Even Scriptural condemnations of sodomy suffer radical reinterpretation and the official documents of the Holy See on homosexuality are alleged not to be considered authoritative as binding in conscience since “struggling” lesbians and gays are not “expected to do the impossible.” They dismissed the authoritative nature of the moral teaching of the Holy See on the ridiculous grounds that “Catholic teaching was formulated without the participation of openly gay and lesbian people, and the teaching doesn’t take into account the lived experience of faithful, gay and lesbian Catholics.”
For the Lopatas artificial birth control practice and divorce-and-remarriage constituted similar moral “dilemmas” that evacuated God’s objective moral norms of their binding force. They falsely stated that the Church’s teachings on the intrinsic evil of contraception, homosexuality, and divorce-and-remarriage are not infallible teachings but rather subject to change. The Lopatas failed to grasp that anyone’s “struggle” with objective moral teachings can never justify the violation of such teachings, and that the Catholic Church understands that though a homosexual orientation is not in itself sinful, openly avowed “lesbians and gays” are those who identify themselves in society as practicing homosexuals,i.e., those who choose to commit sinful homosexual acts and defend their moral liceity. But did not the Apostle Paul teach the faithful in the Church of God: “Be not deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor boy prostitutes, nor practicing homosexuals…will inherit the Kingdom of God?” (1 Cor. 6:9-10). In The Catechism of the Catholic Church, the “sin of the sodomites” ( hardly the sin of inhospitality claimed by the Lopatas) remains one of the “sins that cry to heaven” (CCC, #1867) . Moreover, despite the recourse of the Lopatas to the supposed findings of secular humanist psychologists, it is not a scientific fact (which they assume) that one’s homosexual orientation is a “seemingly irreversible sexual orientation” and never “something freely chosen.” It is clear they foolishly expected change in Catholic moral teaching on homosexuality. In their desire to assure “respect, friendship and justice” for lesbians and gays they only twisted what the Church intends for “pastoral care” of homosexuals. Their book flies in the face of the wise words of the Angelic Doctor: “We love sinners out of charity, not so as to will what they will, or to rejoice in what gives them joy, but so as to make them will what we will, and rejoice in what rejoices us. Hence it is written, ‘They shall be turned to thee, and thou shalt not be turned to them.;” (Summa Theologiae, II-II, q. 25, a.6, ad 4).
The Lopatas’ book “Fortunate Families” constituted, as noted, a sophisticated subversion of Catholic teaching on the pastoral care of homosexuals. While ostensibly commiserating with their sufferings, it ignored the demands of the love of God. Giving lip-service to Catholic teaching, it did not urge conversion to a chaste life-style, but rather revealed a non-judgmental acceptance of impure behavior. The Lopatas did not hide their agreement with those quoted in their book who claimed that the Church’s magisterial teaching is responsible for Catholics becoming negative, bigoted, hateful, hypocritical, oppressive, destructive, and homophobic.
When the Rochester diocese came out of the closet to sponsor in 1998 a scandalous Conference of the gay-friendly National Association of Catholic Diocesan Lesbian and Gay Ministries (NACDLGM), the Lopatas were heavily involved. In his pastoral letter “We all need Redeeming” (September 1, 1998), Bishop Clark noted “NACDLGM is a legitimate group, loyal to magisterial teaching, with an official liason from the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, Bishop Gabriel Zavala.” Auxiliary Bishop of Los Angeles, known as a strong supporter of “human rights” and “social justice” submitted his resignation to the Holy See after revealing to superiors he had fathered two children who are now teenagers.
-James Likoudis
This is Ben again. The above article mentions some issues that were addressed in a fascinating and recent article in First Things.
and another quote that Mike posted in a comment a while back has also stuck with me:
“Years of watching the situation carefully have convinced me that it really IS all about sexual autonomy. People don’t turn institutions upside down because they’d rather hear the Mass in English. You can do that without destroying buildings and the structure of religious life, and catechesis. You turn institutions upside down to support a ‘complete change in teleological purpose’ in your life — and eliminate unpleasant reminders that maybe your new purpose, sexual autonomy, isn’t such a great idea.”
Out of 7 Saints, 2 are New Yorkers
February 20th, 2012, Promulgated by Ben Anderson
You’ve probably heard this story by now, but in case you haven’t.
Pope Benedict to canonize seven saints next October
Cardinal Edward Egan, the Emeritus Archbishop of New York, could not keep a smile off his face as he stood in the sun outside of St. Peter’s after the consistory. He eagerly pointed out that “out of the seven saints, two are New Yorkers.
…
Someone asked me last night whether New York was a secular city? I said it was the most religious city in the world, and if you have any doubt, two out of seven isn’t bad for any state!” he told CNA.
Pretty cool. Although, isn’t it funny how people from NYC mix and match the word “New York” to apply either to the city or the state as they please? Meanwhile those of us who don’t live in the city must be sure to always emphasize State when we say “New York State” so as not to confuse others into thinking that we’re referring to the city. In the case of these Saints, I hereby officially claim them as Upstaters! That makes the grand total:
Upstate: 2
NYC: 0
While we’re at it, I thought these posters going around facebook were funny:
and one more:
photo credit:77krc (flickr)
photo credit: billsoPHOTO (flickr)
Margot Van Etten believes the Church Disdains Women
February 18th, 2012, Promulgated by AbaccioHave you ever noticed how tiresome the arguments put forth by the pseudo-Catholic left become over time? If not, grab yourself a coffee and read these remarks from one of Bishop Clark’s beloved army of “Lay Ecclesial Ministers,” Margot VanEtten, Campus Minister/Director of the Newman Community at SUNY Brockport. Isn’t it nice to realize that Bishop Clark’s reign of heterodoxy has but 148 days until he submits his retirement papers? After that, this craziness will be on borrowed time. Mrs. VanEtten, commenting on this article in America Magazine, (a notoriously heterodox catholyc weekly loved, adored, and glorified by those who worship the “Spirit of Vatican II,”) says the following, emphasis and (commentary) mine:
Of course young women are not attracted to the Church. Why would anyone be drawn to an institution that seems to have such little respect for them? Here’s the evidence:
-before you even begin to discuss the priesthood, the Church has not made the steps it would if women were truly valued, such as opening the diaconate to them.(see later in this post, when we cite Margot’s semi-official bio.)
-Women are not being listened to adequately. Women’s experience too often appears to be ignored or disdained. Like most women, I am not interested in a form of “feminism” which has been developed by men and imposed on me as “authentic”. (Clear rejection of Theology of the Body, and essentially of a great multitude of Catholic teachings. I would suggest she, or any other woman blinded by this misconception, read this book. The Church has repeatedly failed to seek out, value or listen to the experience of women. Rather, leaders still continue to write of us as the “Other”.
-Most of the activities which in an earlier day required women to be members of a religious order if they wished to undertake them can now be engaged with in the secular world. You don’t have to be a sister to teach, to be a nurse, to be a missionary-or even to get and advanced education. Moreover, the opportunities women have in the secular world are far more determined by their skills rather than their gender. Why should it be surprising that women focus there? (The same can be said of men…so this is not gender-specific in the least…)If the Church truly values women, it will address their experience of these issues rather than ignore, stifle or spin them. (Read: Let me be a priest)
I say this as a minister who is loyal and loves the faith despite these grave deficiencies, and I continue to encourage young women to see the Church as a spiritual home. Unfortunately, all too often the voice that discourages them comes from the Church’s leaders-(might I note that perhaps the voice that discourages true femininity are the wannabewomymnpreestz who are all too often the “Church’s leaders” in Rochester. Why would a young woman wish to join a religious order filled to the brim with bitter, embattled old women who despise the very Church they claim to serve? What intelligent, self-respecting young woman would choose to surround herself with post-menopausal women who wish nothing more than to diminish their femininity, in favor of masculinity and call it “feminism” and consider themselves young, hip, social change agents? Note that vocations to orthodox women’s religious orders where femininity is embraced are booming!) not from the secular world.By Margot VanEtten on February 14, 2012 at 11:36 AM
Now, let us examine Mrs. VanEtten’s bio:
Margot is the Full-time Campus Minister for the Newman Community. She has been involved in teaching, campus life, and ministry for more than thirty years.
Margot has a Masters’ Degree in Theology and is an ABD (“all but dissertation”) in English. Along with her husband Larry, she completed the Diocese of Rochester’s Permanent Deacon Training Program. (I wanna be a priest! I wanna be a deacon! I have the same training, so why can’t I do it? You must hate women, Pope Benedict!) She taught English at Finger Lakes Community College and (many years ago) at Penn State. At St. Bernard’s Institute she taught “Introduction to Spirituality” and developed a course in Sacred Ecology. (Sacred what now? I will note that Mrs. VanEtten is somewhat obsessed with “animal rights,” so I should not be surprised. Something tells me that her courses at St. Barnyard’s are…much like most of the courses at the French Road Heresy Factory.) She also developed a course in Self Defense for Women which she has taught at FLCC, Nazareth College and at Harp Karate in Rochester, where she is an instructor. (Margot holds Black Belts in four Martial Arts, which she has been practicing and teaching for more than fifteen years).
In addition, Margot is a Certified Sign Language Interpreter. She has been an Interpreter for the Deaf at Rochester Institute of Technology, as well as Coordinator of Interpreters for the RIT Campus Ministry, and was Pastoral Assistant for St. Mary’s Church of the Deaf (now Emmanuel Church of the Deaf). She has published two articles about religious interpreting and has designed programs for Sexual Harassment Awareness for a local consulting company as well as the Self-defense program offered at Harp Karate and various area colleges. She has wide experience in interfaith ministries and worship,(Oh joy!) and brings a lot of enthusiasm to her work and ministry on campus.
Well, that doesn’t exactly sound like a Catholic bio, but rather that of an earth-obsessed, liberal feminist. Well, let’s see what sort of mission statement Mrs. VanEtten’s SUNY Brockport Newman Community espouses:
In recognition of the importance of spiritual growth in the development of the whole person, the mission of the Newman Catholic Community at SUNY Brockport is to:
- Be present and available to listen, console, and challenge with love.
Now, far be it from me to judge an organizational leader by his or her supposed mission, but…well…actually…that’s exactly what I’m going to do. Does anything in that mission statement even suggest Catholicism specifically? Any mention of the Sacraments, of Holy Mass, of growing in knowledge of the faith? Note the phrase “spiritual growth through…prayer, growth, and study.” First of all, how can one encourage spiritual growth through opportunities for growth? That, my friends, is meaningless drivel! Respect diversity and develop a strong interfaith community? That sure doesn’t sound like someone who believes that “unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you.” Perhaps the lack of an authentically Catholic presence on college campuses plays some part in the lack of twenty-somethings who attend Mass regularly, hm?
It’s amazing what rotten fruit has arisen in the thirty years since Bishop Clark published “Fire in the Thornbush,” his infamous pastoral letter on “Women in the Church.” You can find Cleansing Fire’s review of his 2010 book on essentially the same subject, Forward in Hope: Saying Amen to Lay Ecclesial Ministry” here. Finally, I will note (again) Ecclesiae de mysterio 4, which essentially explains that what happens here in Rochester is quite illicit:
Article 4
The Parish Priest and the Parish
The non-ordained faithful, as happens in many worthy cases, may collaborate effectively in the pastoral ministry of clerics in parishes, health care centers, charitable and educational institutions, prisons, Military Ordinariates etc. Provisions regulating such extraordinary form of collaboration are provided by Canon 517, 2.1. The right understanding and application of this canon, according to which “If the diocesan bishop should decide that due to a dearth of priests a participation in the exercise of the pastoral care of a parish is to be entrusted to a deacon or to some other person who is not a priest or to a community of persons, he is to appoint some priest endowed with the powers and faculties of a pastor to supervise the pastoral care”, requires that this exceptional provision be used only with strict adherence to conditions contained in it. These are:
a) ob sacerdotum penuriam and not for reasons of convenience or ambiguous “advancement of the laity“, etc.;
b) this is participatio in exercitio curae pastoralis and not directing, coordinating, moderating or governing the Parish; these competencies, according to the canon, are the competencies of a priest alone.
Because these are exceptional cases, before employing them, other possibilities should be availed of, such as using of the services of retired priests still capable of such service, or entrusting several parishes to one priest or to a coetus sacerdotum [group of priests].(75)
In any event, the preference which this canon gives to deacons cannot be overlooked.
The same canon, however, reaffirms that these forms of participation in the pastoral care of parishes cannot, in any way, replace the office of Parish Priest. The same canon decrees that “The diocesan bishop … is to appoint some priest endowed with the powers and faculties of a pastor to supervise the pastoral care”. Indeed, the office of Parish Priest can be assigned validly only to a priest (cf. Canon 521, 1) even in cases where there is a shortage of clergy.(76)
2. In the same regard, it must be noted that the Parish Priest is the Pastor proper to the parish entrusted to him(77) and remains such until his pastoral office shall have ceased.(78)
The presentation of resignation at the age of 75 (Clark mandates retirement at 70.) by a Parish Priest does not of itself (ipso iure) terminate his pastoral office. Such takes effect only when the diocesan Bishop, following prudent consideration of all the circumstances, shall have definitively accepted his resignation in accordance with Canon 538, 3 and communicated such to him in writing.(79) In the light of those situations where scarcity of priests exists, the use of special prudence in this matter would be judicious.
In view of the right of every cleric to exercise the ministry proper to him, and in the absence of any grave health or disciplinary reasons, it should be noted that having reached the age of 75 does not constitute a binding reason or the diocesan Bishop to accept a Parish Priest’s resignation. This also serves to avoid a functional concept of the Sacred Ministry.(80)
Fr. McBrien remains a favorite columnist of the Catholic Courier in 2012
February 17th, 2012, Promulgated by Ben AndersonConsider this a guest post by James Likoudis
It would be interesting to find out, if it were able ever to do so, how many Letters of laity to the “Catholic Courier” attempting to defend the doctrines and discipline of the Church were never printed!
Note: I see that in the year 2012 Fr. Richard P. McBrien remains a favorite columnist in the “Catholic Courier” of the Diocese of Rochester. It is really incredible that a priest who continually writes to contradict Magisterial teaching remains without protest or contradiction by the Bishop of the diocese. Other bishops have acted to remove his column from their newspapers and rightfully so. This 2003 Letter sent to the “Catholic Courier” of the Diocese of Rochester was not printed but remains relevant since Fr. McBrien has never retracted his false teaching that since Vatican II Catholics no longer believe the Catholic Church was the true Church of Jesus Christ.
-James Likoudis
June 12, 2003
Letter to the Editor
Catholic Courier
P.O.Box 24379
Rochester, NY 14624
Dear Editor,
In his Catholic Courier column (6/12/03) Fr. Richard P. McBrien once again urges dismissal of the Catholic Church’s discipline of mandated celibacy for priests of the Latin rite. It is clear that he is an apologist for rejecting its maintenance as “a possible solution” for the shortage of priestly vocations. “The rule of celibacy”, he sneers, “is regarded, at least implicitly, as more important than making the Eucharist available to every Catholic”. While ostensibly praising Pope John Paul II’s new Encyclical “Ecclesia de Eucharistia”, he ignores everything the same Pope has written in praise of and defense of the Church’s present discipline on priestly celibacy which is of apostolic origin. “The lack of priests”, the Pontiff noted, “is certainly a sadness for any local Church”, but to be utterly rejected is “the framework of systematic propaganda which is hostile to celibacy. Such propaganda finds support and complicity in some of the mass media.” The shortage of priests that has afflicted the Church in the post-conciliar period, he pointed out, “was based on an erroneous understanding of- and sometimes even conscious bias against- the doctrine of the Conciliar Magisterium. Herein lies undoubtedly one of the reasons for the great number of defections experienced then by the Church, losses which did serious harm to pastoral ministry and priestly vocations, especially missionary vocations.” (Address 11/5/90) It is ironic that writers like Fr. McBrien who presume to speak for “the spirit of Vatican II” are at complete odds with the actual teaching of the Popes and the most recent Ecumenical Council supporting mandated priestly celibacy for priests of the Western Church (See Vatican II’s “Life of Priests”, 16)
Fr. McBrien is indeed a “professor of theology at the University of Notre Dame”, but, interestingly, has not received or even requested a “mandatum” from his bishop to be regarded as an authentic theologian. Moreover, the very concept of the Church presented in this same column is not faithful to Catholic doctrine. Non-Catholic Churches and ecclesial communities may indeed possess a “certain, though imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church”, as Vatican II declared. But, contrary to Fr. McBrien’s erroneous view, such dissident Churches and ecclesial communities cannot be said to be “within the Body of Christ” in such manner that the visible unity of Christ’s one and only Church (which is His Mystical Body) is lost sight of. One of McBrien’s favorite (and false) ideas is that the whole Body of Christ and not the Catholic Church alone is the one true Church of Jesus Christ. But then McBrien’s theology in many respects is not faithful to Catholic doctrine and the Magisterium. The U.S. Bishops’ Committee on Doctrine noted exactly that when in April 1996 it censured McBrien’s major work “Catholicism” which he never bothered to revise as requested.
Sincerely yours,
James Likoudis
The Parable of the Kosher Deli
February 17th, 2012, Promulgated by MikeBishop William Lori of Bridgeport, Conn., is the chairman of the Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops.
He offered the following statement on behalf of the conference yesterday, before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.
The full text of Bishop Lori’s testimony is available here.
The moral authority of professional Catholics
February 16th, 2012, Promulgated by MikeOver the last several years I have noticed increasing numbers of a certain kind of professional Catholic. These are people engaged in Catholic media in a wide variety of formats and specializing in a broad range of subject areas. They all, however, share one thing in common: Each has pretty much spent his or her career studiously avoiding one particular, serious problem within the American branch of the Catholic Church. This problem is not abortion. It is not the shameful rate of divorce among Catholics. It is not even the push for same-sex “marriage,” so called.
No, the problem these people with the EWTN television shows, the radio microphones and the book publishing contracts all treat like a third rail is the scandal of American bishops who have betrayed the Church and have effectively left their flocks to wander in the wilderness. And it is not just those bishops who have done so in the past, but those who continue to do so today.
I was reminded of this situation this morning while listening to Teresa Tomeo’s Catholic Connection show on Ave Maria Radio. The subject was the Obama administration’s recent health care mandate and what our reaction as faithful, lay Catholics ought to be. Early on in the show Teresa offered the following, obviously unscripted comments on that topic (my transcription from the podcast beginning at the 10:55 mark) …
This is our time to stand up and back up the bishops and be their foot soldiers and engage the culture in a loving way. I can’t stress this enough. And, again, as I said yesterday on my show when I had a long talk with Al Kresta and Nick Thomm about this, I’m hearing, still, a lot of angst with people saying, you know, it’s the bishops’ fault we’re in this mess in the first place, yadda, yadda, yadda, because of the lack of teaching over the years.
If you have that frustration, again I’m going to caution you greatly, that that is very damaging and that is also what the devil wants. We are under such grave attack right now from the culture, from our own administration, and now we’re going to attack each other and eat our young?
You know, Al and I have certainly not been shy in mentioning when we think there’s issues, when there’s lack of teaching. EWTN is not shy about that. Mother Angelica began this network because she saw what was happening in this country, that she needed to re-catechize a country and prevent it from falling over into the deep end completely.
We are here to evangelize but we are also here to catechize and to re-catechize and it does no one any good to spew any anger or frustration we have toward what has happened in the past.
Now, do we learn from our mistakes? Absolutely. Do we do things differently and better? Absolutely. But now is not the time to sit there and say, “He should have done that, he should have done this, he needs to do this.” What are you doing to help the bishops who are doing a great job right now? And the sad thing is the bishops who are running this right now are not even the ones who caused the problems in the first place: the Bakers, the Chaputs, the Vignerons, the Cordileones, the Carltons. I mean, we have amazing leadership right now. And if you allow yourself to get caught up in anger and frustration about something that’s hap… I’m not saying that we deny that we, all of us, have done a poor job in the past. But I just really want to encourage you to stand up for the truth and back the Church right now. And if you’re upset then go and kick a garbage can, scream into a pillow, but tell your bishop you will support these efforts to stop what is happening. Because I’ll tell you right now, if this mandate continues and if this is allowed to stand, we’re not going to be able to teach about anything. Who knows what they’re going to try to do to EWTN. Who knows what they’re going to try to do in the churches.
So we need to stop the infighting and we need to love our bishops and to love our Church. We are all imperfect. The only two people who ever existed, Jesus, being fully God and fully man, and Our Lady. We all have planks in our eye that we can pull out. And this is not minimizing anything that has happened in Church history. But the infighting is not going to help us, it’s only going to hurt us and it’s what the devil wants: Divide and conquer.
Halfway through this commentary I emailed the following to Ave Maria Radio…
We have amazing leadership right now?
While that may be the case in some dioceses, it is far from a universal truth.
You don’t live in upstate New York, do you? Have you ever heard of Matthew Clark or Howard Hubbard?
I wish you and the majority of the “professional Catholics” out there would get your collective heads out of the sand and take a good look at what is going on in some dioceses in this country, not in the past, but RIGHT NOW!
We are living in a wilderness here and most of you people with the microphones and the publishing contracts couldn’t care less, as is evident from your collective lack of attention to our plight.
Sorry, Teresa, but some of our bishops are currently doing Satan’s work and I and my friends refuse to be silent about it, no matter how much you would like us to have a united front. We have consciences, too.
Needlessto say, I was a bit surprised when Teresa mentioned my note on the air (my transcription, same podcast, beginning at the 44:24 mark) …
I just received an email from a Mike. I don’t want to say where he’s from because I don’t know if what he’s saying about his bishops are true and I would want to give, with all due respect to the hierarchy, them a chance to explain, but he’s saying that we have our heads in the sand and that we think everything is wonderful – I’m paraphrasing here – wonderful and hunky-dory because there are a lot of bishops who aren’t doing anything and my response, and I’m writing him back right now, is, what’s the point of this, how is your whining going to help anyone. If your bishops aren’t doing anything, do something yourself. Sitting there complaining is only going to make matters worse. What have you done and what are you willing to do?
That was some paraphrase. How she got that out of my email escapes me. I said nothing about the response of area bishops to the Obama mandate, but that’s what she chose to read into it. Very telling, however, is that my assertion that some “bishops are currently doing Satan’s work” seemed totally invisible to her. And this is not the first time that Teresa has ignored negative comments about sitting bishops. Within the past year I have heard her effectively cut off two callers who had critical things to say, and I only catch her show once or twice a week.
So now I am faced with this question: Should I listen to someone who has, over the years, willfully or otherwise, turned a professional blind eye to much of the episcopal misfeasance and malfeasance that is largely responsible for the mess we face today? Should I stop my “whining” about ongoing heterodoxy and heteropraxis for what she believes to be the greater good? Does her record in this area give her the credibility, the moral authority, to even make that request?
If it were someone like Michael Voris asking, I’d have to give it serious thought.
Teresa Tomeo? I think not.
Valid Matter ?
February 15th, 2012, Promulgated by MonkI came across this photo on the St. Mary’s (downtown) website. What is this priest consecrating? It sure doesn’t look like unleavened bread to me. Apparently, they have a entire group of volunteers that bake bread each week for Mass. Does anyone know if the Eucharist at St. Mary’s is valid matter? Their website states that their “celebrations are grounded in the spirit of Vatican II.” This image may be in the spirit of something but certainly not Vatican II. Are these children being spiritually abused? Very disturbing.
Mass at St. Mary's Downtown Rochester
Treasures from the Library/Digital Library
February 14th, 2012, Promulgated by AbaccioConstantly, my friends tell me, “Abaccio, you should read this here book, you’d love it!” I always tell them, quite honestly, that I’ll add it to my list. Unfortunately, the list grows faster than I can read! As I was venturing through my theological library (now over 500 printed volumes, not including booklets), I realized that contained therein were some real treasures. I’m sure I’ll make a similar post in the not-too-distant future continuing on this thread, but, for the time being, some cool old books I recommend to all of you!
1.) The Holy Bible, Douay-Rheims Version (Challoner revision), 1914, 1400pp. I have a great multitude of Bibles, but this one is my favorite, by far. I picked it up at an estate sale a few years back for the low, low, price of one dollar, and it has served me quite well. It may take a wee bit to get used to, as certain books have different names than in modern translations, and the Psalms retain the “Catholic” numbering.
2.) Breviarium Romanum, 1928, 1200pp. This is such a neat little piece of history, though it is not exactly the easiest breviary to use. Why, you ask? The instructions, as well as the text, are in Latin! Once one figures it out, however, the beauty of the prayer is unsurpassed. I got this for fifty cents in a lot of books online.
3) Liber Usualis, 1934, 1900pp. The liber contains most versions of the ordinary chants of the Mass (Kyrie/Gloria/Credo/Sanctus/Benedictus/Agnus Dei, and Proper Chants for every commonly-celebrated liturgical feast. Furthermore, it contains ritual-specific and Divine Office chants. If you are a liturgical music aficionado, this is a spectacular resource. I splurged for my liber to the tune of $68. That’s still 50 dollars cheaper than currently available online, so I’ll consider it a steal!
4) Raccolta, 1929, 550pp. This is a really neat book that you almost never see anymore. From 1807 until it was replaced in 1967, it served as a collection of indulgenced prayers and good works, along with their specified indulgence. Again, this came in the same lot of books as my Breviarium. 50 cents!
5) The Faith of Our Fathers, 1876, 440pp. When a friend asked for my favorite book, I cited this one. This book was essentially directed at the conversion of Protestants, by explaining the basic tenets of the Faith, and why we hold them. I actually have a few copies of it, but this one is certainly my favorite. Why? The book sold millions of copies (as of 30 years ago, it was in its 111th printing), and printed on the title page of this one, is “the fortieth thousand.” I found this buried among decades of dust in my grandmother’s attic. free!
I mention these books specifically because just this evening, I came across the best “app” I have ever seen, entitled iPieta. For a mere $2.99, it includes:
1) The Douay-Rheims and Latin Vulgate Bibles: Available side-by-side
2) Liturgical Calendars (and daily readings), both Ordinary and Extraordinary Forms; both Latin and English.
3) Hundreds of Prayers, both in Latin and English, including the Divine Mercy Chaplet, the Extraordinary Form of Mass, the prayers for Benediction, the rosary (with mysteries), litanies, creeds, novenas, the way of the cross, a whole slew of confession resources and prayers, the Little Office of the Blessed Virgin Mary, and hundreds of other prayers.
4) A veritable library of fantastic theological resources, including the following:
- Baltimore Catechisms and Catechism of Christian Doctrine
- Introduction to the Devout Life, by St. Francis De Sales
- The Imitation of Christ, by Thomas Kempis
- The works of St. Louis Marie de Montfort, St. Therese of the Child Jesus, and St Teresa of Jesus
- The works of St. John of the Cross, St John Vianney, and St Josemaria Escriva.
- The Catechetical Instructions of St. Thomas Aquinas
- The Roman Catechism (also knows as The Catechism of The Council of Trent or The Catechism of Pope St. Pius V)
- The Summa Theologica, by St. Thomas Aquinas
- Haydock’s Bibilical Commentary
- Catena Aurea (St. Thomas Aquinas’ collection of Church Fathers on the Gospels)
- Spiritual Exercises (St. Ignatius of Loyola)
- Every Papal Encyclical and Council Document
- The Lives of the Saints
- The Raccolta
- The Rule of St Benedict
- The works of St. Augustine, St John Chrysostom, and the Nicene and ante-Nicene Fathers
- The Faith of our Fathers, by Cardinal Gibbons, and much, much more!
Furthermore, for a mere 99 cents, one can acquire the app Breviarium Meum, which has side-by-side Latin-English for all 8 hours, as well as a treasury of prayers. Very easy to use!
Finally, for those who would love a Liber, but don’t have $100 lying around, the app Liber Pro is $14.99, and very easy to use.
Romney on Mandating Contraception
February 13th, 2012, Promulgated by Ben Anderson10 Days ago Republican nominee Mitt Romney wrote an editorial in the Washington Examiner.
President Obama versus religious liberty
On January 20, 2012, the Obama administration affirmed a rule that would force Roman Catholic hospitals, charities, and universities to purchase health insurance for their employees that includes coverage for contraception, abortifacients, and sterilization, in violation of their religious principles. This is wrong.
As you can see Romney was quite critical of the recent Obama/HHS decision and appeared to be a strong supporter of religious liberty. However, if you look at his record and not just his expedient commentary, you’ll find a slightly different picture.
Romney: Flip-Flopping on Contraception?
This story is a little more complex than the current issue with Obamacare, so you’ll want to read the whole story to truly understand all the nuances, but here’s the gist.
…
Romney said, “My own view is that every hospital should provide to rape victims information about emergency contraception, or emergency contraception itself.”
…
“Romney reversed course on the state’s new emergency contraception law yesterday, saying that all hospitals in the state will be obligated to provide the morning-after pill to rape victims,” reported the Boston Globe on December 9.
…
“They’ve taken the position now that the preexisting statute somehow does not shield Catholic and other private hospitals from this new mandate,” Avila told the Pilot, a Boston Catholic newspaper.
…
C. J. Doyle, executive director of the Catholic Action League of Massachusetts… was displeased by his decision to heed his lawyers’ advice and nullify the older conscience statute. “It was Governor Romney who effectively pulled the rug out from under Catholic hospitals by coming up with this rather novel, unheard-of interpretation of this pre-existing statute,” he says.
As I mentioned, this story is nuanced. So it’s only fair to provide these words as well.
Anne Fox, president of Massachusetts Citizens for Life, reflects on the incident with more sympathy for Romney. “His lawyers came in and said, ‘This is the way it has to be,’” she says of the December 2005 incident. “I’m not sure how many people would have said, ‘Well, I don’t care.’ I don’t know what else he might have done.”
Just something to be aware of. If you’re looking for someone to staunchly defend religious liberty, Romney might not be your guy.
Who is Your Conscience Boycotting?
February 12th, 2012, Promulgated by HopefullBesides activities within the Church which don’t seem faithful to magisterial teaching (like the Catholic Campaign for Human Development) who else are you boycotting?
I’ve stopped going to Starbucks because of their gay rights fervor. And I’ve been boycotting Susan Komen for several years because of the Planned Parenthood connection. Now I’ll have to boycott them as well for their sheer stupidity and lack of conscience, deciding matters of conscience by counting tweets.
I don’t buy Girl Scout cookies either because of the PP connection.
So who are you boycotting, and why? Hope some readers will share their thoughts. I may add onto this post as others come to mind. And I’ll post some boycott links here too:
To sign a boycott petition against gay-friendly (gay-pushy) Home Depot: www.BoycottTheHomeDepot.com.
Smoke and Mirrors (or how stupid does he think we are?)
February 10th, 2012, Promulgated by Ben AndersonToday the airwaves praised President Barack Obama for his great willingness to compromise in a heated debate. If you filled out the petition “Rescind the HHS Dept. Mandate Requiring Catholic Employers to Provide Contraceptives/Abortifacients to Their Employees” at whitehouse.gov, you likely received this official White House response (don’t click this link if you plan on sleeping soon because your blood will boil) in your email today:
Now, as we move to implement this rule, however, we’ve been mindful that there’s another principle at stake here –- and that’s the principle of religious liberty, an inalienable right that is enshrined in our Constitution. As a citizen and as a Christian, I cherish this right.
…
The right to religious liberty will be fully protected,
Sounds pretty decent, right? Except that it is a lie. What exactly is the “accommodation” that President Obama has made? Get this – contraception will be provided for “free” by the insurers. Of course, the free contraception (and other abortifacients) are not free to all – only those people who are in the plan. So, if you, as an employer, buy the plan for your employees then they receive the “free” contraception. If you don’t buy the plan they don’t receive the free contraception. But don’t worry, you aren’t actually paying for that part of the plan. Got that? I didn’t think so.
The White House’s email finishes with 4 endorsements – two from the “Catholic” side (Catholics United and the Catholic Health Association) and two from the culture of death side (NARAL and Planned Parenthood) which is supposed to demonstrate the goodness of the great compromiser. Well, Mr President, I’ve got some better names to share with you from the Catholic side. Former Vatican Ambassador Mary Ann Glendon, Princeton Prof. Robert George, Notre Dame Law Prof. Carter Snead, Catholic University of America President John Garvey, and EPPC Fellow Yuval Levin issued the following response:
It is no answer to respond that the religious employers are not “paying” for this aspect of the insurance coverage. For one thing, it is unrealistic to suggest that insurance companies will not pass the costs of these additional services on to the purchasers. More importantly, abortion-drugs, sterilizations, and contraceptives are a necessary feature of the policy purchased by the religious institution or believing individual. They will only be made available to those who are insured under such policy, by virtue of the terms of the policy.
Other responses (shamelessly stolen from Fr Z’s site):
“At first reading, the so-called “accommodation” offered by the Obama Administration seems to fall short of the requirements of the moral law,” said Bishop Tobin. “Although the discussions about this matter will continue, the bottom line is this: the government cannot require religious institutions or individuals to operate in a way that violates their convictions. Our nation cherishes religious freedom. By what authority does the President of the United States seek to impose this immoral policy? This is the United States, not North Korea.”
Bishop Zubiek of Pittsburgh (video) calls Obama’s accommodations “smoke and mirrors”.
Note: People cannot seem to get this story right. John Delano, the reporter in the above video, posed the dilemma this way:
1) Is a woman entitled to birth control no matter where she works
or
2) can religious institutions … deny their employees access.
You, John, and most of America are completely fumbling this story! Apparently professional newspeople are using this opportunity to prove that bloggers who work for free are actually more qualified at reporting news than they are. No employer is attempting to deny women access to birth control here. Let me rephrase this dilemma for you:
1) gov’t can force employers to buy any products or services for their employees the gov’t says they must
or
2) employers are free to choose to offer whatever benefits they wish to their employees
Which one is freedom and which one is tyranny? It’s amazing how many people have this story completely backward. The MSM is doing their best to add to the confusion.
And here’s Jimmy Akin’s response: Don’t Be Deceived! Evil Obama Policy Now Even MORE Evil!
Epic “Catholicism Series” – Special Local Screening!
February 10th, 2012, Promulgated by BernieGreat News!!! A special screening of four episodes from the Catholicism series by Fr. Robert Baron and Word on Fire is going to be sponsored by the Knights of Columbus of Saint Damien of Molokai Council 11411 on four dates this spring. The screenings of four episodes from this ten-part series is open to anyone but the seating is apparently rather limited. Four or five episodes were on EWTN recently but, if you missed those, here is another opportunately to get a really nice taste. Orders, at discounted prices, for the complete DVD sieres and also the book, Catholicism -which contains more detail than the script of the DVD series- will also be taken. I think they have to get a minimum number of orders to get the discounted prices.
The screenings will be held in the rather beautiful and comfortable social hall of Saint Anne Church, 1600 Mt. Hope Avenue, Rochester. A large and high definition screen will be used to show the episodes. (It hangs over a really nice fireplace and mantle. Just like home!)
Here are the dates:
March 19: Episode 1: Amazed and Afraid – The Revelation of God Become Man
March 28: Episode 2: Happy Are We – The Teachings of Jesus
April 9: Episode 3: The Ineffable Mystery of God – That Than Which Nothing Greater Can Be
April 23: Episode 4: Our Tainted Nature’s Solitary Boast – Mary, the Mother of God
The cost is $15.00 per person which admits you to all the screenings. No, you can’t buy tickets for individual screenings. (The clincher for me –pastries, coffee, soft drinks, bottled water included!)
The dates are coming up fast and this is the first place this event has been made public. It’s actual targeted market is in just a few parishes so I doubt you will see it advertised anywhere else. (We’re on top of everything here at CF)
For reservations: tripster@rochester.rr.com
(Click on the poster to see a larger image)
See the extended trailer of short excerpts at the following link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=yXz7CiIovJ8&feature=fvwp
