Feeds:
Posts
Comments

May 17,2009 President Obama will speak at the University of Notre Dame. That day is the last day that one can call that university Catholic.

Selecting the President to speak to the graduating class after lifting the Mexico City policy, the selection of pro-abortion catholic members of his cabinet has openly challenged the teaching authority of the church on the issue of abortion. The faculty has chosen President Obama over their faith in God and in the collective witness of the past 2,000 years of church history. They will formally rejected not just the human virtues of stable disposition, perfection of intellect and will, nor guidance in conduct. They have rejected the gifts of the Holy Spirit – Wisdom, Understanding, Counsel, Fortitude(Courage), Knowledge, Piety, and Fear of God. Most sad of all is they have given up on the theological virtue of hope.

Is Obama worth a Mass?

The Vice President spoke at Gerogetown university

VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT FIFTEENTH ANNIVERSARY SYMPOSIUM

The irony of such an honor is VP Bidens support for abortion and the violence against women in the womb and the women who due to lack of support from the biological father & their parents feel compelled to terminate their childs life.

Xavier University in the Big Easy has also followed suit with national democratic strategist Donna Brazile.
St Joseph’s University of Philadelphia will have political commentator Chris Matthews another catholic pro-abortion spokesmen.

Can dhimmitude be far off?

Like the catholic product they have produced over the past 40 years, some of these theologians only teach Vatican II lite. It is no wonder that they find their theological center in the documents that interest them, but have worked to directly undermine or ignore those Vatican II documents which don’t fit their agenda.

 
“For the full recognition of the decrees of the Second Vatican Council” The papal cancellation of the excommunication of bishops from The Society of St. Pius X signifies the reception into full communion with the See of Rome those who have consistently opposed the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.

Regarding the anti-Semitic remarks and the denial of the German national-socialist persecution of the Jews by Bishop Richard Williamson and his followers, we share the indignation of our Jewish sisters and brothers. Moreover, we state that the SSPX’s attitude towards Judaism does not correspond to the Council’s understanding of and commitment to Jewish-Christian dialogue. We support the recent statements of Bishops’ Conferences, and others, all over the world, on this issue. We also welcome the recent statements made on these matters by Pope Benedict XVI and the Vatican’s Secretariate of State.

We believe that the close correlation between the excommunication’s cancellation and the 50th anniversary of the calling of a General Council of the Church by Blessed Pope John XXIII gives a clear indication of the direction which the present Papacy wishes to take. We sense a desire to return to a pre Vatican II Church with its fear of openness to the breath of the Holy Spirit, a positive appreciation of ‘the signs of the times’, and the values of democratic institutions. We are very concerned that this act of rehabilitation heralds a turn-around on important documents of Vatican II, for example, the decree on ecumenism “Unitatis Redintegratio”, the declaration on non-Christian religions “Nostra Aetate”, the declaration on religious liberty “Dignitatis Humanae” and the Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World, “Gaudium et Spes”. Such an act will have a disastrous effect on the credibility of the Roman-Catholic Church. For Catholics who love their Church, the price is too high!

The Pope hopes this act will help unify the Church. However we think it is particularly outrageous that the Vatican’s renewed overtures to a schismatic traditionalist movement have been undertaken without the imposition of any conditions whatsoever. In June 2008, on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of Levebvre’s excommunication, the SSPX rejected the invitation of the Holy See towards theological reconciliation. Likewise, the fraternity rejected the invitation to sign a five-topic declaration containing conditions for its re-integration in the Roman Church.

A return to full communion with the Catholic Church can only be made possible if the documents and teachings of the Second Vatican Council are fully accepted without any reservations, as requested by the motu proprio “Summorum Pontificum” on the topic of the Tridentine rite. It is also imperative that the papal ministries of Blessed Pope John XXIII, Pope Paul VI, Pope John Paul I, Pope John Paul II, and Pope Benedict XVI are recognised and accepted. The Church of Rome, perceived as the Barque of St Peter, lists heavily as long as the Vatican: * only rehabilitates the “lost sheep” at the traditionalist edge of the Church, and makes no similar offer to other excommunicated or marginalised Catholics * persists in preventing progressive theologians from teaching * refuses dialogue with all movements in the Church (Essen, January 28, 2009)

We Are Church UK 5 February 2009 (Based upon an original text by Prof. Dr. Norbert Scholl, Angelhofweg 24b, D-69259 Wilhelmsfeld) http://www.petition-vaticanum2.org/pageID_7327623.html

 

SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM

32. The liturgy makes distinctions between persons according to their liturgical function and sacred Orders, and there are liturgical laws providing for due honors to be given to civil authorities. Apart from these instances, no special honors are to be paid in the liturgy to any private persons or classes of persons, whether in the ceremonies or by external display.

36. 1. Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites

63. Because of the use of the mother tongue in the administration of the sacraments and sacramentals can often be of considerable help to the people, this use is to be extended according to the following norms:

a) The vernacular language may be used in administering the sacraments and sacramentals, according to the norm of Art. 36.

86. Priests who are engaged in the sacred pastoral ministry will offer the praises of the hours with greater fervor the more vividly they realize that they must heed St. Paul’s exhortation: “Pray without ceasing” (1 Thess. 5:11). For the work in which they labor will effect nothing and bring forth no fruit except by the power of the Lord who said: “Without me you can do nothing” (John 15: 5). That is why the apostles, instituting deacons, said: “We will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word” (Acts 6:4).

116. 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.

But other kinds of sacred music, especially polyphony, are by no means excluded from liturgical celebrations, so long as they accord with the spirit of the liturgical action, as laid down in Art. 30.

GRAVISSIMUM EDUCATIONIS

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decl_19651028_gravissimum-educationis_en.html

APOSTOLICAM ACTUOSITATEM

http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19651118_apostolicam-actuositatem_en.html

10. Students who follow the venerable tradition of celibacy according to the holy and fixed laws of their own rite are to be educated to this state with great care. For renouncing thereby the companionship of marriage for the sake of the kingdom of heaven (cf. Matt. 19:12), they embrace the Lord with an undivided love altogether befitting the new covenant, bear witness to the resurrection of the world to come (cf. Luke 20:36), and obtain a most suitable aid for the continual exercise of that perfect charity whereby they can become all things to all men in their priestly ministry. Let them deeply realize how gratefully that state ought to be received, not, indeed, only as commanded by ecclesiastical law, but as a precious gift of God for which they should humbly pray. Through the inspiration and help of the grace of the Holy Spirit let them freely and generously hasten to respond to this gift.

They are to be warned of the dangers that threaten their chastity especially in present-day society. Aided by suitable safeguards, both divine and human, let them learn to integrate their renunciation of marriage in such a way that they may suffer in their lives and work not only no harm from celibacy but rather acquire a deeper mastery of soul and body and a fuller maturity, and more perfectly receive the blessedness spoken of in the Gospel.

 

Perhaps a survey of how often these theologians pray the Divine Office, or include Gregorian Chant in the Liturgy, preserve the use of latin or refrain from withdrawing priestly celebacy.

Perhaps had the IMPLEMENTATIONS of Vat II conducted by these man in underminding or circumventing the full Vatican II documents not their truncated view of it not been carried out, we wouldn’t be faced with groups like the SSPX having left the church.

Their other problem is that “Aggiornamento” has been demonstrated to be an almost utter failure for the church. I hope that B16 will be given the time to implement “Ressourcement” which IMO is what was desired by the Vatican II council fathers.

Pope Benedict always links the church’s past with his present action. This coming week he links his
lecture at the University of Regensburg, Germany with his speech to be given at the Collège des Bernardins in Paris. President Sarkozy may be the Pope’s unlikely ally  in a country that has dropped to less then 10% attendance for Mass. I suspect that the increase in Muslim population also at 10% may pose problems for the extreme secular state. So I would say the President is using the pope to create a bit of historic French nationalism with cultural Catholicism and the Pope is hoping to rekindle the faith in the country that was traditionally called the first daughter of the church.

Another interesting take on it comes from America 

The first is that the radical exclusion of religion from the public sphere known as laïcité is increasingly being questioned. There are many reasons: social breakdown and high levels of Muslim immigration are causing the French to see the Church as “theirs” more than they did, while church-led social movements are among the most prophetic and energetic in France.

Whatever the reasons, it is France’s own president, Nicolas Sarkozy, who is recognising this shift in his call for a “positive laïcité“, calling for the state to have a “structured dialogue” with faiths and for Catholics and others to play a greater role in public life. This is an attempt, not without its risks, to move the French model more in the direction of the American one — towards Church-state separation as a means to protect the freedom of faith rather than to put it into a box marked ‘private’…

The second contemporary paradox is that France is the Catholic country with the strongest-declining congregrations and clergy while also being the Catholic country with most vigorous Catholic “revivals” and movements.

And finally John Allen over at National Catholic Register provides a broader view to the issue of B16 and the ‘creative minority’ of French Catholics.

Interview with Speaker Pelosi on Meet th Press.

REP. PELOSI:  I would say that as an ardent, practicing Catholic, this is an issue that I have studied for a long time.  And what I know is, over the centuries, the doctors of the church have not been able to make that definition.  And Senator–St. Augustine said at three months.  We don’t know. The point is, is that it shouldn’t have an impact on the woman’s right to choose.  Roe v. Wade talks about very clear definitions of when the child–first trimester, certain considerations; second trimester; not so third trimester.  There’s very clear distinctions.  This isn’t about abortion on demand, it’s about a careful, careful consideration of all factors and–to–that a woman has to make with her doctor and her god.  And so I don’t think anybody can tell you when life begins, human life begins.  As I say, the Catholic Church for centuries has been discussing this, and there are those who’ve decided…

MR. BROKAW:  The Catholic Church at the moment feels very strongly that it…

REP. PELOSI:  I understand that.

MR. BROKAW:  …begins at the point of conception.

REP. PELOSI:  I understand.  And this is like maybe 50 years or something like that.  So again, over the history of the church, this is an issue of controversy.  But it is, it is also true that God has given us, each of us, a free will and a responsibility to answer for our actions.  And we want abortions to be safe, rare, and reduce the number of abortions.  That’s why we have this fight in Congress over contraception.  My Republican colleagues do not support contraception.  If you want to reduce the number of abortions, and we all do, we must–it would behoove you to support family planning and, and contraception, you would think.  But that is not the case.  So we have to take–you know, we have to handle this as respectfully–this is sacred ground. We have to handle it very respectfully and not politicize it, as it has been–and I’m not saying Rick Warren did, because I don’t think he did, but others will try to.

MR. BROKAW:  Madame Speaker, thanks very much for being with us.

REP. PELOSI:  It’s my pleasure.  Thank you.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26377338/page/3/

Congresswoman Pelosi couldn’t be more wrong. Science tells us exactly when human life begins – its at conception. The zygote is created from the combination of male spern with a female’s egg (ovum). Both the sperm and ovum have 23 chromosomes each. This zygote is different geneticly from either parent and is unique. It has a capacity to grow, respond to stumulo, reproduce and adapt to their environment. Hence a zygote is alive. Humans have 46 chromosomes.

Therefore the zygote is alive, its unique, its human. As I said at conception. There is no mystery about it anymore.

What I think the speaker of the house meant to say is we don’t know when this human life becomes a person.  Science can measure when the fetus has brain waves and heart beats and when its essential organs are formed. But does that constitute a person?

The church says a person is make of body and soul. The church does not know when God gives the body a soul, but it is prior to natural birth. Until the mystery of when a fetus becomes a person can be demonstrated, society has to assume that its a conception.

Speaker Pelosi’s position is not in line with the church. Even Tom Brokaw was able to express the churches view without refering to notes. Redemptionis Sacramentum

numbers 81 & 83 [81.] The Church’s custom shows that it is necessary for each person to examine himself at depth, and that anyone who is conscious of grave sin should not celebrate or receive the Body of the Lord without prior sacramental confession, except for grave reason when the possibility of confession is lacking; in this case he will remember that he is bound by the obligation of making an act of perfect contrition, which includes the intention to confess as soon as possible”.

[83.] It is certainly best that all who are participating in the celebration of Holy Mass with the necessary dispositions should receive Communion. Nevertheless, it sometimes happens that Christ’s faithful approach the altar as a group indiscriminately. It pertains to the Pastors prudently and firmly to correct such an abuse.

The first obligation is Speaker Pelosi. The second is Archbishop Niederauer. He claims he has not had the opportunity to speak with her about her position on abortion.  It is impossible for me to believe that the archbishop can be engaged in anything other then dissembling, but I’m forced to give him the benefit of the doubt. Ever Catholic in the San Francisco area should request that he speak with the Speaker of the house and provide her with her churches teaching in the matter. By this I mean the universal churches teaching, not her local priest or even her bishop, but what the collective body of Christ says.

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”.

In order to shed light on this difficult question, it is necessary to recall the general principles concerning cooperation in evil actions. Christians, like all people of good will, are called upon under 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. Such cooperation occurs when an action, either by its very nature or by the form it takes in a concrete situation, can be defined as a direct participation in an act against innocent human life or a sharing in the immoral intention of the person committing it. 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. Each individual in fact has moral responsibility for the acts which he personally performs; no one can be exempted from this responsibility, and on the basis of it everyone will be judged by God himself (cf. Rom 2:6; 14:12).

 Her speaking at a Catholic university at graduation is implicit support of her distorted view on abortion.
Well the archbishop has 3 years left before he’s replaced, I pray he takes some time to assist the speaker in her spiritual fog. It’s well pass the point of scandal for her, inaction on the archbishop’s part is no only an option in my opinion.

 
The Cardinal Newman Society (CNS) had urged the University of San Francisco (USF), a Jesuit, Catholic university, to cancel its invitation to Speaker Pelosi to deliver the university’s commencement address.

Humanae Vitae

 17. Responsible men can become more deeply convinced of the truth of the doctrine laid down by the Church on this issue if they reflect on the consequences of methods and plans for artificial birth control. Let them first consider how easily this course of action could open wide the way for marital infidelity and a general lowering of moral standards. Not much experience is needed to be fully aware of human weakness and to understand that human beings—and especially the young, who are so exposed to temptation—need incentives to keep the moral law, and it is an evil thing to make it easy for them to break that law. Another effect that gives cause for alarm is that a man who grows accustomed to the use of contraceptive methods may forget the reverence due to a woman, and, disregarding her physical and emotional equilibrium, reduce her to being a mere instrument for the satisfaction of his own desires, no longer considering her as his partner whom he should surround with care and affection.

Finally, careful consideration should be given to the danger of this power passing into the hands of those public authorities who care little for the precepts of the moral law. Who will blame a government which in its attempt to resolve the problems affecting an entire country resorts to the same measures as are regarded as lawful by married people in the solution of a particular family difficulty? Who will prevent public authorities from favoring those contraceptive methods which they consider more effective? Should they regard this as necessary, they may even impose their use on everyone. It could well happen, therefore, that when people, either individually or in family or social life, experience the inherent difficulties of the divine law and are determined to avoid them, they may give into the hands of public authorities the power to intervene in the most personal and intimate responsibility of husband and wife.

And so the Pope’s warning has come to pass. And still the people cry give us more pills. A secular response came from an unlikely source – George Arthur Akerlof professor of economics @ Berkeley

Fr. Curran & fellow theologian Dan Maguire at the time the encyclical came out, drew a popular “Statement of Dissent” and many priests sign that document with him. It is likely that this is the single most ignored and derided papal document of all time.

I found an article by  Cardinal James Francis Stafford @ Catholic News AgencyI thought it would be helpful to those who didn’t go through the late 60’s sexual revolution from a priests view of Humanae Vitae.

Yet if one looks at Pope Paul VI’s document especially the paragraph quoted above you can see that he could see what would be fall man.

Will resume some topics this weekend.

The feast days of the church were drilled into me from an early age. But frankly by the time I was in my 20’s I only paid attention to the 4 major events of the Incarnation, Good Friday, Easter Sunday and Penecost. Of course being Irish-American I have to add St. Patricks day naturally (and I mean that in a religious celebration not a bar room one).

In my 30’s the seasons of Lent and Advent came back, especially after having children. 

In my 40’s however I started an off and on prayer life with the Liturgy of the Hours. At first I only found infrequent revelance to the daily readings in my life, but the more I applied myself in reading them the more it seemed that funny/quirky coincidences kept coming up, which were too timely to be just that – a considencie.

These were issues of reforming sinful areas in my personal life. But then it seemed that I found my self having read something that day that applied to another person in my life or even a stranger whom I struck up a conversation with & no thought of sharing the Gospel with them.  They seemed to open up the subject and the daily reading seemed to fit the bill. Frankly it was rather unsettling. On the one hand it had a sort of direct line to God element to it. The odd thing was it wasn’t something I could call upon when needed. There wasn’t a on/off switch. Any time I tried to use it, it never seemed to be effective.

In my late 40’s I seemed to get to caught up with family and work matters and that part of my prayer life declined. I picked it up again now that I’m starting on my 50’s.

The reason I’m posting this is a lead in to something like one of those type of “quirky coincidences” I referred to earlier.

 

Michael A. Monsoor Michael A. Monsoor

I was reading about a young Navy Seal who received The Medal of Honor for his action in Iraqi. His parents named their child Michael after St. Michael the Archangel. President Bush noted “On Saint Michael’s Day — September 29, 2006 — Michael Monsoor would make the ultimate sacrifice.” Perhaps Michael’s parents saw the “coincidence” of the date or perhaps the President did.

I guess many or perhaps most would call this a coincidence. I prefer to see the hand of God in it.

A final point of reference for me was out of curiosity I happened to look back at what Pope Benedict said in his Sunday sermon the week that Michael died to save his fellow soldiers. For a Catholic a sermon is used to try, with the best of their ability to apply the message of the sermon they received and incorporate it in their lives for that week.

The sermon is IMO uncanny. The references to human self sacrifice for their fellow man, giving of the supreme sacrifice and then the message after the sermon with reference to the Stella Maris (apostleship of the sea) & the care of seafarers(since he was a Navy SEAL), just floors me. As a Catholic who attended mass, I am assuming that he listened to those words of the Gospel and perhaps the chaplain addressed a similar theme as Pope Benedict XVI did. In any case Michael certainly lived out the Gospel message and honored all of humanity and the call of his Lord and saviour that fateful week.

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

In this Sunday’s Gospel, for the second time Jesus proclaims his passion, death and Resurrection to the disciples (cf. Mk 9: 30-31). The Evangelist Mark highlights the strong contrast between his mindset and that of the Twelve Apostles, who not only do not understand the Teacher’s words and clearly reject the idea that he is doomed to encounter death (cf. Mk 8: 32), but also discuss which of them is to be considered “the greatest” (Mk 9: 34).

Jesus patiently explains his logic to them, the logic of love that makes itself service to the point of the gift of self: “If anyone would be first, he must be last of all and servant of all” (Mk 9: 35).

This is the logic of Christianity, which responds to the truth about man created in the image of God, but at the same time contrasts with human selfishness, a consequence of original sin. Every human person is attracted by love – which ultimately is God himself – but often errs in the concrete ways of loving; thus, an originally positive tendency but one polluted by sin can give rise to evil intentions and actions.

In today’s Liturgy, this is also recalled in the Letter of St James: “Wherever jealousy and selfish ambition exist, there will be disorder and every vile practice. But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, without uncertainty or insincerity”. And the Apostle concludes: “The harvest of righteousness is sown in peace by those who make peace” (Jas 3: 16-18).

These words call to mind the witness of so many Christians who humbly and silently spend their lives serving others for the sake of the Lord Jesus, behaving in practice as servants of love, and hence, “artisans” of peace.

Sometimes, certain people are asked for the supreme testimony of blood, which also happened a few days ago to the Italian Religious, Sr Leonella Sgorbati, who died a victim of violence. This Sister, who served the poor and the lowly in Somalia for many years, died with the words “I forgive” on her lips: this is the most genuine Christian witness, a peaceful sign of contradiction that demonstrates the victory of love over hatred and evil.

There is no doubt that following Christ is difficult, but, as he says, only those who lose their life for his sake and the Gospel’s will save it (cf. Mk 8: 35), giving full meaning to their existence. There is no other way of being his disciples, there is no other way of witnessing to his love and striving for Gospel perfection. May Mary, whom we call upon today as Our Lady of Mercy, open our hearts ever wider to the love of God, a mystery of joy and holiness.


After the Angelus:

Next Thursday is World Maritime Day and I would like to invite all of you to pray for the men and women involved in seafaring, and for their families. I thank the Lord for the work of the Apostleship of the Sea, which for many years has offered human and spiritual support to those who live this difficult and challenging way of life. I welcome particularly the recent initiatives taken by the International Maritime Organization to contribute to the fight against poverty and hunger. May Our Lady, Star of the Sea, look down in love upon seafarers and their families, and upon all those who care for their human and spiritual needs.

Pope Benedict XVI -ANGELUS-September 24, 2006 

 
 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.