Wednesday, December 31, 2014

Let’s not overstate Bugnini’s role in propagating the Novus Ordo



From the book The Second Vatican Council:An Unwritten Story, comes the following excerpt:

“There were those who tried to place all the responsibility fort eh Novus Ordo on the shoulders of Monsignor Bugnini, interpreting his removal from office as Pope Montini’s response to the treason of which he was supposedly the victim. The testimonies to the contrary are utterly conclusive and no surprising, Paul VI, one of his biographers Yves Chiron wrote, will no doubt go down in history as the pope who brought the Second Vatican Council to its conclusion, but also as the one who gave the Church a new Mass. From the 1930’s on, in fact, the young Montni, under the influence of Father Bevilacqua, had been a follower of the “Liturgical Movement,” in which he saw the ecllesial expression of Maritian’s humanism.”

Earlier in the book, Roberto de Mattei recounts that Monsignor Bugnini was only removed from the concillium and exiled to Tehran after what might be said to be a type of blackmail that would have exposed the Masonic influence in the hierarchy itself. So too the victim mentality that often is spoken of in connection to Paul VI was a real aspect of Paul VI’s personality, it might have been related to the war he was so heavily involved with under Pius XII.  For more on the victim mentality of Paul VI in action read Michael Davie’s Apologia Pro Marcel Lefebvre which is mind blowing!

Happy New Year! Pray for the Holy Father!


+JMJ+

Monday, December 29, 2014

Pray for Priests (and update on Fr. Walker and Terra FSSP)


Fr. Kenneth Walker, Fr. Joseph Terra: (FSSP Supporters Facebook)

Take the time today to pray for priests!

A Prayer for Priests to the Mother of God Mother of our Redeemer,

In this era dedicated to you, with great joy we call you blessed. You believed in the Word of God the Father and declared yourself His handmaid, and so, through you, the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us. We salute you as Mother, our Mother, the Mother of the Church. With what great love you must have watched over the infant Church and what motherly solicitude encouraged the apostles as they committed themselves to carry on the work of Your Divine Son on earth. Make the Church ever to be the sign and instrument of intimate union with God.

 To you, our Mother, we entrust in a special way our Bishop and the priests of our diocese. To them has been given a special sharing in the priesthood of Your Divine Son.He has chosen them to be ministers of His Word and Sacrament. Ask Him to fill them with zeal, to keep them faithful and joyful in His service, conscious of the fact that they care and so bring glory to the Father and honor to the Church.

 Holy Mother, increase the ranks of our priests by inspiring our young people to be more generous in their response to serve Jesus in the priesthood and in religious life. 

 Sustain all of us, O Virgin Mary, on our journey of faith and obtain for us the grace of eternal salvation.


Also, Fr. Terra recently blessed a new stained glass window in Fr. Walkers memory:

h/t FSSP Supporters

Friday, December 19, 2014

Monday, December 15, 2014

A reflection by Chesterton on the real and actual simplicity of the Catholic Faith (Fixed)

The following excerpt comes from the latest issue of Gilbert Magazine, more specifically it is part of an essay by Chesterton Called "The Definition of the Dragon", originally published in the New Witness (October 8, 1920)

“In person Chesterton was a large man who was something of a strain on his clothes."
"...Here we might take the body as an illustration of the soul. Health is a simple and single thing – so long as you have got it. A young man walking in wild and sun for pleasure does not say. “How harmoniously my left lung is working,” or “I take particular pleasure in the nervous system of my right leg.” So long as those things are all right they are all one thing. And so, for all I know, there may be a spiritual state in which all truths are one truth, and that a simple and self-evident truth. For all I know, there may have been some Garden of Eden in which a man really did not need a theology, and could really be content with a religion. Nor need I deny that others; that children or a particular sort of poets may have some such short cut to paradise. But all such speculations are irrelevant in the face of admitted maladies or mishaps. If a man’s lung is threatened with pneumonia, it is no good to ask him why he is not content with the simple breath of life breathed into his nostrils by God in the Garden of Eden. It is no good to call medical details morbid or medical distinctions pedantic. If a man has had a fall and broken his leg, it is not helpful to urge him to continue the march of progress, or exult the ecstasy of perpetual motion. Still less is it helpful to complain of the ugliness of the anatomical diagrams from which the doctors learn how to mend his leg. But according to any sane philosophy that any sane person can possibly hold, it is obvious that man is at least very liable to fall somehow and break something. This being so, we cannot do without ugly diagrams and morbid details and pedantic distinctions. We cannot do without them in the case of the soul any more than in the case of the body. Or, to speak more strictly, we can do without them in the case of the body. Or, to speak more strictly, we can do without them for considerable periods of security and unconsciousness; but we always discover the need of them in hours of danger and disintegration. And when I said that the Catholic philosophy formulated in mediaeval times is still the foundation even of modern morality, I might say that it is in this sense the unconscious foundation. It is so, at least, where that morality is moral..."

Friday, December 12, 2014

New Series for St. Stans Facebook page

Greetings!

So recently I was given a little bit of influencing power over the St. Stans Facebook page...



Not that much but now I am activly involved with the content being shared.

Either sometime later today or tomorrow morning St. Stans Facebook will feature a new series of posts entitled "Extraordinary Questions".  The purpose of these posts will be to explore real honest questions put forth by people within and without Our Holy Mother touching mostly on topics related to the traditional teachings and practices.  Below you will find the unedited (soon to be for the actual posting) first post.  I hope you enjoy and I will likely post them all here as time goes on too.


Why is the Eucharistic prayer of consecration silent to those in the nave?

I would first like to thank you all for sending in the questions for our “Extraordinary Questions” posts.

Our first question is related to the prayer of consecration over the host and the chalice.  Specifically it was asked why can’t people not in the sanctuary hear what is being said like how it is done in the Ordinary Form?

This is a fantastic question and there is much to be said on the matter.  It should first be noted that the prayer is not said to us as if it was a prayer of intercession seeking our help in return.  Instead, the prayer is specifically said with its direction being made toward the host.  When the priest says “This is My Body” he is speaking to the host and the substance (the breadness, for lack of a better term) is transformed into the literal body of Christ, while the accidents (taste and texture of what was once bread) remain. Thus it can be stated that the consecration prayer can be said in a very low tone because the purpose of it is not for our understanding, rather it is for transubstantiation to take effect.
There is another aspect of the question that seems to be implied, that being why is there a sort of shielding or veiling of the words said from the people in church?  Some people may object to the use of Latin or the near silent nature of the spoken prayer saying that when Christ died the temple veil was torn from top to bottom revealing the Holy of Holies, that was once reserved to only the high priest, was now afforded for all to see. 

To this it should be remembered that we veil that which is Holy.  Whether it is the tabernacle which is veiled with the cloth in front or the women’s head with a hat or mantilla, that which is set apart for God is veiled.  When Moses went up on the mountain to talk with God he was so affected by seeing the Lord that his face was shining with the Glory of God (Exodus 34:35). The Jewish people seeing such a wonder asked him to veil himself and he did so.  So too Latin and perceived silence act as a type of veil in the west, while the iconostases veils the prayers among the Eastern Rite Catholics.  In both ancient rites the veil of silence to those assisting at the liturgy is observed.
Our modern day focus on needing to have our senses fulfilled in-order to participate in the sacred can best be re-ordered by hearing the story of Elias:

And he said to him: Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord: and behold the Lord passeth, and a great and strong wind before the Lord over throwing the mountains, and breaking the rocks in pieces: the Lord is not in the wind, and after the wind an earthquake: the Lord is not in the earthquake. And after the earthquake a fire: the Lord is not in the fire, and after the fire a whistling of a gentle air. And when Elias heard it, he covered his face with his mantle, and coming forth stood in the entering in of the cave, and behold a voice unto him, saying: What dost thou here, Elias? And he answered: With zeal have I been zealous for the Lord God of hosts: because the children of Israel have forsaken thy covenant: they have destroyed thy altars, they have slain thy prophets with the sword, and I alone am left, and they seek my life to take it away.”

Silence and gentleness is of God, who is Meek and Humble of Heart. Let us pray that we too may learn to be virtuous and submit our desires and wills to him daily.


+JMJ+

-------------------------------

Update: Its now up!


Friday, December 5, 2014

"You can't change the world..."

Those were the words of my mother recently after I was trying to gently get my family to recognize the importance of the Sabbath.
Source

In this age of lackluster, luke-warm faith, dominated by spiritual and temporal relativists it seems like there is no safe place for an absolutist to lay his head.  Just making mention of truths being actually capital T true evokes anger and ddefensivenessamong those (including my own fallen self) that prefer modernities comforts. Rather than seeing the opportunity for holiness we (I especially) sink to the lowest common denominator, ignoring the formed conscience in favor of following irrational passions.

St. Wojtyla in veritatis splendor reminded us that conscience has rights because it has duties to observe .  These are true rights, not the american values often under girded by sentimental texts given in modernity.  Their ends are with God, every action must have its end in something, either for or against God.  Even indifference is an affront to the living God, for existence and sustenance are given for this time to each of us and to lack desire for good or bad is to waist a gift as mere triviality.

I do believe that part of the issue rests with protestantism, and how the faith alone idealism (and frankly nonsensicalism) led to the deception that your day to day decisions have no moral, and necessarily eternal, consequences.  The protestant cannot imagine the call to moral excellence because they are so depraved that any attempt at such would be fruitless because ultimately all fruit related to us in anyway is rotten according to them. Yet the call from our Blessed Lord "Be ye perfect..." was no mere idealistic proposal, but a necessity.  Nothing imperfect enters heaven, The call to holiness is a definate and it is not enough to say I cant do it.  Take up your cross.

Will you fall?  It is likely at least in small ways you will, but the sacraments particularily confession is there for you!

Each of us make a difference in this world with every action we take, seen or unseen, heard or silent.  Consider how the church has always considered liturgical abuses causing harm to the world, not just spiritually, but temporally because this world is not just spirit as the sacramental structure of the mass is not just spirit.

Modernity must be confronted, but how this needs to be done is not a uniform formality.  We tend to think that our personal apostolates need to have many people in attendence and growing as a result of our efforts at every time of the day, this is well meaning but it lacks hope.  12 Jewish boys were sent to the edges of the world (no im not a flat Earther) sometimes having success and at other times having none.

Mother Theresa reminds us that our call is not to success, rather to faithfullness.  You can change the world if you put everything you have into living for Him, with Him and in Him.  This life of ours is a gift.  As Mother Angelica says "We are each called to be great saints, dont miss the opportunity!"

+JMJ+

Tuesday, December 2, 2014

“If your church was built on Simon Peter you have a rough foundation.”

This is kind of abstract but see this through.
In a debate between Karl Keating and Dr. Peter Ruckman the latter stated the following:

“If your church was built on Simon Peter you have a rough foundation.”

The thing is that God can use anyone he wants to do his will without defeating their own free will, but he always chooses the least so they can be seen as magnifying his glory. 

Consider the following examples:
Gideon’s remaining army
David
St. Mary Alacoque
St. Bernadette

Protestants tend to believe that Jesus wouldn’t use such a broken vessel like Peter who can do such good then have to be corrected sternly by Paul. It would be easy for God to take hold of Alexander the Great or a great Paraoh to do his will, but how much more amazing is it for him to use a sinner like you and I to change the whole world?
There is a beauty in God’s plan that we cant see often because our sin has darkened our vision.  I think GK Chesterton out of all people takes on and answers the Why Peter question the best in his book Heretics:


“Now this is, I say deliberately, the only defect in the greatness of Mr. Shaw, the only answer to his claim to be a great man, that he is not easily pleased. He is an almost solitary exception to the general and essential maxim, that little things please great minds. And from this absence of that most uproarious of all things, humility, comes incidentally the peculiar insistence on the Superman. After belaboring a great many people for a great many years for being unprogressive, Mr. Shaw has discovered, with characteristic sense, that it is very doubtful whether any existing human being with two legs can be progressive at all. Having come to doubt whether humanity can be combined with progress, most people, easily pleased, would have elected to abandon progress and remain with humanity. Mr. Shaw, not being easily pleased, decides to throw over humanity with all its limitations and go in for progress for its own sake. If man, as we know him, is incapable of the philosophy of progress, Mr. Shaw asks, not for a new kind of philosophy, but for a new kind of man. It is rather as if a nurse had tried a rather bitter food for some years on a baby, and on discovering that it was not suitable, should not throw away the food and ask for a new food, but throw the baby out of window, and ask for a new baby. Mr. Shaw cannot understand that the thing which is valuable and lovable in our eyes is man—the old beer-drinking, creed-making, fighting, failing, sensual, respectable man. And the things that have been founded on this creature immortally remain; the things that have been founded on the fancy of the Superman have died with the dying civilizations which alone have given them birth. When Christ at a symbolic moment was establishing His great society, He chose for its corner-stone neither the brilliant Paul nor the mystic John, but a shuffler, a snob a coward—in a word, a man. And upon this rock He has built His Church, and the gates of Hell have not prevailed against it. All the empires and the kingdoms have failed, because of this inherent and continual weakness, that they were founded by strong men and upon strong men. But this one thing, the historic Christian Church, was founded on a weak man, and for that reason it is indestructible. For no chain is stronger than its weakest link.

Monday, December 1, 2014

Pope Francis against common Eucharistic celebrations with Protestants

Francis admonished for ad limina visit Swiss bishops: not blur difference between priests and laity!

 Vatican City (kath.net/KAP/red) Francis Pope has spoken out against a common celebration of the Eucharist by Catholics and Protestants. "If we have to hide our Eucharistic faith under the pretext of a certain accommodation by, then we take our own treasure neither nor our interlocutor seriously enough," he said on Monday in front of the Swiss bishops at the Vatican. In ecumenical dialogue, the bishops should make sure that the believers of all faiths could live their faith "unambiguous and free of confusion" and "without the differences at the expense of truth wegzuretuschieren".

At the same time, the Pope, the Swiss bishops called on the difference between priests and laity not to blur. It is good to acknowledge the dedication of the laity and support, but this must always be "in clear respect for the difference between the common priesthood of the faithful and the ministerial priesthood." The bishops would have their followers the importance of the truths of faith for the liturgical, parochial, family and social life convey. For this purpose, they would have their employees select "carefully". In addition, the Pope warned against over-reliance of the Catholic Church in Switzerland by state institutions. If the church avoided to depend on organizations "that could impose through economic means a style of life, the little Christ" have to do that it would "make the gospel more visible" in their structures He called for further clarification of the ratio to between church and state.

Read the Rest HERE

h/t Matthew Olson

Monday, November 24, 2014

Pope Alexander VI: Setting the Record Straight!!

It seems like, with all the bad news coming out today about the Church over the last 100 years, a scape goat is needed by modernity to make them feel better.  One might expect honest talks about clergy that have abused their authority to be put forth, but it seems like we now use some that had authority and seemingly abused it to justify modern madness.  Take for instance the curious case of Michelle Arnold of Catholic Answers who in an attempt to side step the real issues associated with St. John Paul II’s papacy attacks the perennial  scape goat Pope Alexander VI.

Pope Alexander's Portrait
Yes, that Alexander VI.  The Borgia Pope with a TV show on HBO supposedly based on his life and times. All the accusations from the Banquet of Chestnuts, to the fornication allegations, are a curious case of perpetual gossip and assumption that were made in his day by the likes of Savonarola to today’s mainstream apologists like Tim Staples and Michelle Arnold.  The problem is that these accusations are more problematic then those that propose them realize.  Ask the accusers to produce the evidence needed and they can only point to lists of bad Popes to justify their slanders.
That is why I am glad to bring to your attention a series of articles written by Matthew Olson of Answering Protestants and Catholic Analysis which attempt to shed some light on the real Pope Alexander VI, and dispel rumors that have so harmed the character of this renaissance pontiff.

Here is a tidbit from the first part of the series on “The Personality of Pope Alexander VI”

“…Rodrigo also had an overpowering charitable bent. He was a patron of more than one hospital, and he gave alms regularly (weekly, sometimes bi-weekly).
One man said publicly to Rodrigo, “During the many years that thou hast been a cardinal and vice-chancellor, no one has requested help from thee, which thou didst not grant at once; to no one didst thou ever refuse legitimate protection; no one, struck by misfortune or provoked by injustice, has implored thy aid in vain. It was not unusual for thee, not only to come to the assistance of one to one [sic] who did not request it.” The man elaborated for a while.And not only was Rodrigo charitable toward the poor, but he was charitable with his time, too, in that he frequently assisted his fellow cardinals with their administrative duties. He slept little. [5]… Continue HERE) 
You can read the whole series HERE, and please do spread this information to stop the slanders that have so belittled a Pope that as you will learn was a reformer before it became cool to be so.


+JMJ+

Friday, November 21, 2014

Roberto deMattei: How Vatican II had a real and lasting effect on religious sisters



The Following is an excerpt from the fantastic work "The Second Vatican Council - An Unwritten Story" by Professor Robert deMattei:

The “Updating” of religious life

“… Cardinal Spellman, as he opened the debate on November 10, asserted that, with the introduction of some modifications, the text could be accepted. Spellman denounced the risks of the so called modernization or “updating” of religious life, in an implicit polemic against Cardinal Suenens who in a book devoted to the Apostolic Development of the Religious Women (published in English as the Nun in the world), had proposed a radical reform of women’s religious life and saw in Vatican Council II the opportunity to carry it out. This reform, for the primate of Belgium, would have to redefine the role of women religious, by giving them an adequate “social training” and by making them spiritual directors of lay women. To this end it would be necessary to eliminate mercilessly certain “out of date” and “redundant” devotions that tended to “make the life of prayer mechanical and to atrophy it,” and to transform the “spiritual exercises of women religious so as “to amend and simplify them, to give their piety a a more biblical, liturgical, ecclesiastical and apostolic basis.”

Cardinal Suenens invited nuns to be more sincere and open in their mutual relations and to engage in “constructive self-criticism” of their religious practices.” He added that women religious must avoid giving the impression of “living outside the world they are trying to save,” as though isolated in a ghetto; the religious habit will have to be completely adapted to relations with the world and dispense with forms and rituals that no longer are part of our era. The concept of “obedience” also will have to be revise: the renunciation of one’s own will must not be placed before the service of the common good. The common good sometimes requires that subjects assert their point of view before superiors make a decision…



Bishop Guilly found it “truly surprising” that the schema on religious contained “so little about the other orders and congregations that are dedicated strictly to contemplative life.” It is precisely ‘these men and these women who with their prayers and their austeritites, their silence and their sacrifices, contribute more than all the others to the advancement of the Church’s apostolate.”

Bi-Polar News Friday

Two interesting articles:

Bill Murray Misses the Old Latin Mass

"One new saint he does approve of is Pope John XXIII (who died in 1963). “I’ll buy that one, he’s my guy; an extraordinary joyous Florentine who changed the order. I’m not sure all those changes were right. I tend to disagree with what they call the new mass. I think we lost something by losing the Latin. Now if you go to a Catholic mass even just in Harlem it can be in Spanish, it can be in Ethiopian, it can be in any number of languages. The shape of it, the pictures, are the same but the words aren’t the same.” 

Isn’t it good for people to understand it? “I guess,” he says, shaking his head. “But there’s a vibration to those words. If you’ve been in the business long enough you know what they mean anyway. And I really miss the music – the power of it, y’know? Yikes! Sacred music has an affect on your brain.” Instead, he says, we get “folk songs … top 40 stuff … oh, brother….”

Read the rest HERE


Memories of Madness gone by.. or has it? 
"In March 1981, Lucker was the first bishop in the United States to appoint pastoral administrators (who are often radical nuns) as leaders of parishes. He created an international sensation when he placed one of his rural parishes under interdict until every member received psychological counseling. The parishioners' crime: They objected to a nun-catechist trained in New Age spirituality by Matthew Fox catechizing their children, and her decision to replace the crucifix in the church's sanctuary with a 'cosmic pillow.'"

Read the rest HERE

+JMJ+ 

Thursday, November 20, 2014

The time is short MSW...

And the hour approaches for your agenda to be fulfilled.

Can you taste the victory?

Your hand is on the table, a high flush.

Grasp it now the voice says.

The world is your puppet.

The end is within your sight.

Your shadow grows, pronouncements become crisp.

Rumors of your reign are gossiped within the Holy of Holies.

Your thrown set, the pawns willing.

Right is the distinction, but not to the end.

Universality a mere political sham.

Reporters and wheels break the barriers without constraint.

This is indeed your time take joy for it will end.

That not being eternal burns in the flames of justice.

Including your petty facade.



Wednesday, November 19, 2014

Headline: Is Pope Francis Backpedaling on Gays?

From the mindless chatterbox arena comes the following:

Is Pope Francis Backpedaling on Gays?  

The Vatican’s cheery-sounding ‘complementarity’ symposium’ is really an attack on sex outside of marriage—gay sex, single sex, divorced sex, and all 50 shades of grey in between. Pope Francis is not Jesus Christ. Or even Martin Luther. He may well transform the Catholic Church, and has already gained unprecedented popularity as the reformer we’ve all been waiting for. But as events this week confirm, he is not omnipotent, and does not intend to change fundamental Catholic doctrine—if he even could. The event in question is “The Complementarity of Man and Woman: An International Colloquium,” an interreligious symposium presented by some of the Vatican’s most conservative voices. To understand the significance of Pope Francis’s remarks at this bizarre event, it’s necessary to back up a bit. You may have noticed that roughly 100 percent of higher animals reproduce sexually, requiring a male and female partner to do so. This is the core of “complementarity,” and it would not seem to require an international colloquium to explain. Complementarity as conservative Catholics use the term, however, is more than biology. It stands for the proposition that the biological basis of procreation should also be the sole organizing principle of society. Only mating pairs constitute a family, and any configuration that is not a mating pair—divorced people, gay people, single people—are not to be legitimized. Otherwise, society will collapse. I am not exaggerating this position. Complementarity also means, of course, than men and women are fundamentally different. In an earlier era, this was obvious. Men rule, women serve; men fight, women nurture. Today’s complementarians have to be more subtle—Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus—but the basic principle remains. Just like you need a sperm and an egg to make a baby, so you need a boy and a girl to create a harmonious pair. The idea of complementarity is an essential part of Natural Law, the Catholic Church’s quasi-secular-but-not-really philosophy that everything in the world has its “natural” role, which is good, and its “unnatural” perversions, which are bad. “Complementarity,” like “family values,” “religious liberty,” and “traditional marriage” is a term defined by what it opposes—non-procreative sex. Sex is not for fun; sex is for procreation. Food is not for fun; food is for nourishment. In fact, St. Thomas Aquinas, the most important Catholic Natural Law thinker, called any “misuse” of sensual pleasures luxuria—not just luxury in the contemporary sense, but decadent luxury, pleasure beyond purpose. Evil. All of this matters, of course, because the Catholic Church is a multi-billion dollar international organization with 1.2 billion adherents (40 percent from Latin America, like Pope Francis). The Economist has calculated that it spends $170 billion annually in the United States alone. A great deal of that money goes to imposing its view of Natural Law on the rest of us, spending billions to restrict abortion and contraception, and fight any recognition of same-sex (“unnatural”) couples. Now, wasn’t Pope Francis going to change all that? No. Never. It was revolutionary when Pope Francis said “Who am I to judge?” when asked about gay people. But it was revolutionary in a specific, limited way. What he meant was that he personally, and by extension all Christians, should not be judgmental. The Church should welcome everyone— gays, divorcees, criminals—because that is what Christ did. And, who knows, eventually they will straighten out. I’m being a bit dismissive here, but this really is a significant evolution. I know many gay people who were thrown out of their churches, and those of us who were around in the 1980s remember how Cardinal John O’Connor and others blamed gays for AIDS and refused to help New Yorkers dying from the plague. But an evolution in tone is not a change in doctrine. Essentially, Pope Francis is urging Christians to “love the sinner, but hate the sin.” Which brings us back to this week’s colloquium, presented by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith—originally known (until 1908) as the “Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman and Universal Inquisition.” Yes, that Inquisition. The CDF has, for five centuries, been a bastion of Catholic conservatism, and today is no exception. It was headed for 20 years by Joseph Ratzinger (later Pope Benedict XVI), who produced such gems as labeling gay people “intrinsically disordered.” Now its prefect is Cardinal Gerhard Müller, who led the opposition to any softening of the church’s stance against divorcees at last month’s synod of bishops, and who has gone after American nuns for being too feminist and spending too much time fighting poverty instead of opposing gay marriage. And let’s not even talk about gay people. So, while the Colloquium is presented as a neutral, and interreligious, conference on the beauty of traditional marriage, its significance is anything but anodyne. Beyond the snappy website and mission to “examine and propose anew the beauty of the relationship between the man and the woman, in order to support and reinvigorate marriage and family life for the flourishing of human society,” its real-world impact would be to deny secular legal status to anyone who does not fit is conception of “complementarity.” Just look at the list of speakers, a who’s who of theological conservatives from a breadth of Western religious traditions. There’s Russell D. Moore, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, which recently decided that transgender people don’t exist, and which expelled a church whose minister said he no longer believes homosexuality to be a sin—after his own son came out as gay. There’s Nigerian Anglican Primate Nicholas Okoh, who called the ‘homosexual agenda’ an “evil wind blowing across the Western world,” and who supports Nigeria’s vicious new anti-gay laws. And of course there’s megachurch pastor Rick Warren, who has strenuously denied helping to bring about Uganda’s anti-gay law, but whose fingerprints are all over it. As in Jerusalem, where opposition to a gay pride march united Jewish, Catholic, Orthodox, and Muslim conservatives, “complementarity” has the power to bring people together. But don’t be misled. “Complementarity,” like “family values,” “religious liberty,” and “traditional marriage” is a term defined by what it opposes—non-procreative sex, same-sex unions, contraception, and usually (though not always) feminism. Where is Pope Francis in all of this? First, in his opening remarks yesterday, the pontiff towed a much more conservative line than his legion of new fans might expect. “The complementarity of man and woman,” he said: is a root of marriage and family… We now live in a culture of the temporary, in which more and more people are simply giving up on marriage as a public commitment. This revolution in manners and morals has often flown the flag of freedom, but in fact it has brought spiritual and material devastation to countless human beings, especially the poorest and most vulnerable.” That is not exactly a message of liberation, and it confirms the speculation of some Vatican-watchers that the whole colloquium is a way for the pope to placate the conservative base that has begun (unthinkably) to rebel against him. But at the same time, the pope didn’t quite go all the way either. Notice he said that complementarity is “a root” of family, not “the root.” And he also said things like In these days, as you embark on a reflection on the beauty of complementarity between man and woman in marriage, I urge you to lift up yet another truth about marriage: that permanent commitment to solidarity, fidelity and fruitful love responds to the deepest longings of the human heart. I urge you to bear in mind especially the young people, who represent our future So when the pope says to a room of conservatives: Do not fall into the trap of being swayed by political notion. Family is an anthropological fact—a socially and culturally related fact. We cannot qualify it based on ideological notions or concepts important only at one time in history. We can’t think of conservative or progressive notions. Family is a family. What does he mean, exactly? Does he mean that the non-hetero-dyad family is a “political notion”? Or is he saying that family is an “anthropological fact,” i.e., one determined not by outdated “ideological notions” but by the lived realities of people as they are? Are conservative ideologues, as one of the Pope’s close advisors said earlier this year, “people who don’t understand reality”? Given the audience—a room full of conservatives—what does it mean to say “We can’t think of conservative or progressive notions”? We can only speculate as to the intentions behind these ambiguous words. Perhaps the Pope is telling his conservative base what they don’t want to hear, in the guise of telling them what they do. Perhaps, as one cardinal recently complained, the chaos is the plan. Or perhaps Pope Francis is not the pope of progressives’ fantasies after all. Even if he is, though, the pope may be infallible, but he is not omnipotent. As this week’s gathering shows, there are powerful conservative forces within the Catholic Church and beyond it. And for every encomium to the harmonious, procreative union of male and female, there is a trampling of everyone else.


It was on the daily beast and i am not linking to it... but it is a question that Fr. Z keeps putting out... when will they go after Francis for being Catholic?  Answer is never, they are delusional.

Pray for them!

Monday, November 17, 2014

I just dont understand Cardinal O'Malley

"In an interview with “60 Minutes” on CBS that producers said took more than a year for them to persuade him to do, O’Malley seemed troubled by reporter Norah O’Donnell’s question as to whether the exclusion of women from the Church hierarchy was “immoral.” O’Malley paused, then said, “Christ would never ask us to do something immoral. It’s a matter of vocation and what God has given to us.” “Not everyone needs to be ordained to have an important role in the life of the Church,” he said. “Women run Catholic charities, Catholic schools …. They have other very important roles. A priest can’t be a mother. The tradition in the Church is that we ordain men. “If I were founding a church, I’d love to have women priests,” O’Malley said. “But Christ founded it, and what he has given us is something different."

Read the whole thing HERE


+JMJ+

Friday, November 14, 2014

A Special Threat: ISIS declairs war against Roman Christians

Just when you thought the religion of peace couldn't get much better...

O soldiers of the Islam- ic State, be ready for the final campaign of the crusaders. Yes, by Allah’s will, it will be the final one. Thereafter, we will raid them by Allah’s per- mission and they will not raid us… And so we promise you (crusaders) by Allah’s permission that this campaign will be your final campaign. It will be broken and defeated, just as all your previous campaigns were broken and defeated, except that this time we will raid you thereafter, and you will never raid us.We will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women, by the permission of Allah, the Exalted. This is His prom- ise to us; He is glorified and He does not fail in His promise. If we do not reach that time, then our children and grandchildren will reach it, and they will sell your sons as slaves at the slave market
You can read the rest HERE

... I would remind the reader of the third secret but I wear a tin foil hat and am obsessed with black helicopters outside my office right now.  This is the area of peace promised... dont worry its de fide that the consecration occured spiritually... or... lets leave it at that... lol

Tuesday, November 11, 2014

The Real Issue Today, with a little help from Chesterton


Source

“Pessimism is not in being tired of evil but in being tired of good. Despair does not lie in being weary of suffering, but in being weary of joy. It is when for some reason or other the good things in a society no longer work that the society begins to decline; when its food does not feed, when its cures do not cure, when its blessings refuse to bless.
- GK Chesterton The Everlasting Man

Monday, November 10, 2014

St. Peter's Daughter? Ora Pro Nobis?

Until about a month ago I had never heard this story.  Apparently there is a tradition within the Church which recounts the sanctity of St. Peter's family, specifically St. Petronilla who is said to be his daughter.

"In The Roman Martyrology the Church seems to officially acknowledge Saint Peter's paternity:  "St. Petronilla, Virgin [and Martyr], daughter of the blessed apostle Peter, who refused to marry the nobleman Flaccus. Given three days for consideration, she spent them in fasting and prayer. On the third day, having received Christ sacramentally, she gave up her spirit." 
    But the less official sources are not all so sure. Some place her death in the first century, where it would have to be if she were Peter's daughter, but others date it as late as the third century. Some, noting that her body was found in the catacomb of Flavian Domitilla, suggest that she was a member of the Roman senatorial family of the Flavii. The inscription on her tomb reads "Aure‘ Petronill‘ Fili‘ Dulcissim‘," possibly indicating relationship to an earlier branch of the Flavii, known as the Aurelii. She is not mentioned in fourth century calendars, but this absence may actually place her death in the first century, before the Church began to venerate the martyrs liturgically.1 A fourth century fresco in the cemetery of Domitilla depicts her about to be put to death.2    But there is some evidence that the Martyrology is accurate in naming Petronilla as St. Peter's daughter. Another painting, made around 356, presents Petronilla "receiving a deceased person (named Veneranda) into heaven."3 This strongly suggests that she was venerated as a saint before this time -- and it is interesting to see her performing the duties normally associated with Saint Peter (perhaps, filling in for her father?). 
    We know from the Synoptic Gospels and from patristic sources that St. Peter was married, so children are not beyond possibility. Clement of Alexandria related that Peter's wife died a martyr on the same day as Peter (i.e. not after an abnormally brief marriage), and that Peter had children who (in contrast to the daughters of Philip) apparently did not marry. A daughter of St. Peter is mentioned but not named in the apocryphal gnostic Acts of St. Peter. Obviously, the name 'Petronilla" could be a diminutive of "Peter.'"
Continue HERE

Tuesday, November 4, 2014

How Archbishop Karol Wojityla and Archbishop Lefebvre were silenced at the council on Religious Liberty

Most people think that Archbishop Lefebvre was stubborn and unwilling to work with the Vatican at any expense, but this is a grave mis-characterization.  For instance, when the first document exploring “Religious Liberty” was provided to the council fathers, the English and Italian speaking fathers sided with the document, while Spanish, Polish speaking fathers and those from the mission field stood strong in favor of Cardinal Ottoviani’s stance against the Cardinal Bea document.   It is interesting to note that even a young Archbishop Karol Wojtyla (later to be JPII) stood against the revolutionaries proclaiming that only the truth will set men free!

Below you will find an excerpt from Roberto de Mattei’s book on the council explaining how the attempt to reign in the revolution was thwarted by the French and Pope Paul Vi himself:

“On October 9, Cardinal Bea received a letter from Bishop Felici informing him of the Holy Father’s wish that the text on religious liberty be rewritten and telling him that for this purpose a Joint Commission would be set up, comprised of members of the Secretariat for Christian Unity and the Theological Commission, along with Cardinal Michael Browne, the master general of the Dominicans Aniceto Fernandez, Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre and Bishop Carlo Colombo. Apart from the last-mentioned, a man on whom the Pope relied, the other three were staunch opponents of the declaration on religious liberty. 
The progressives immediately mobilized, alarmed especially by the name of Archbishop Lefebvre. On Sunday, October 11, there was an afternoon meeting at the residence of Cardinal Frings, attended by Cardinals Leger, Joseph-Charles Lefebvre, Meyer, Ritter, Silva Henriquez, Dopfner and Alfrink attended. That same evening a dramatically phrased letter, signed by thirteen cardinals, arrived on the pope’s desk. It read: “Not without great sorrow have we learned that the declaration on religious liberty (…) is to be sent to a certain Joint Commission, of which, it is said, four members have already been designated, three of whom seem to stand in contradiction to the orientation of the council on this question.” 
On October 12 a note by the Secretary of State referred to the fact that the French episcopate was not disposed to accept the possible nomination of Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre as a member of the commission for the revision of the schema. The note, passed on by Cardinal Cicognani to the pope, was expressed in these words: “1) His Excellency Bishop Marcello Lefebvre (sic) would be considered as a sort of lack  of confidence in the episcopacy, among whom such a nomination would not be favorably received (sic, given the more than ‘extremist’ positions that Archbishop Lefebvre has taken in various circumstances. I thought it advisable to authorize Bishop Martin to announce that no nomination had been made and that Archbishop Lefebvre will not be among those chose beforehand.” 
Two days later, the notice was made public by the daily Il Messagero and caused quite a stir. On October 16, in the new instructions conveyed by the Secretary of State to Bishop Felici, the names of Archbishop Lefebvre and of Father Fernandez had disappeared and the role of the commission was reappraised. The two principal “theorists” of religious liberty, John Courtney Murray and Pietro Pavan, would assume the task of working on the revision of the text, favoring an “Anglo-Italian” approach of a political-juridical type rather than the theological and moral one, as the French-speaking theologians were requesting with these words: “You shall see, our document will be approved.” In an interview with Daniel Pezeril, the pope asserted: “perhaps I am slow. But I know what I want. After all, it is my right to give careful consideration. Bishop Pavan described Paul VI’s intervention on the conciliar document as “decisive.”

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Roll Back Roe Swing Dance to Benefit the Pregnancy Help Center - St. Stans (11/14)

Sursum Corda MKE welcomes all people aged 18 to 40 to a dance benefiting the Pregnancy Help Center!

We Hope to See You There!!!







share-able:


Monday, October 27, 2014

St. John Fisher: Sermon Against the Pernicious Doctrine of Martin Luther

Source
I am most ecstatic to announce that I have finally come across the translated works of St. John Fisher (originals in Latin and rather pricey).  Please Find the Link below to one of his three works against Luther (one of three, the other two I am still looking for or will have to translate on my own).

Also in the future expect a posting of a series of talks by Michael Davies on the Holy Bishop of Rochester and the Drunkard Monk

Click HERE for the text and many other translated works by the saint.


+JMJ+

Friday, October 24, 2014

A Little Brideshead Humor for Your Weekend

Evelyn Waugh's Masterpiece

"After dinner Brideshead said: 'I'm afraid I must take Sebastian away for half an hour. I shall be busy all day tomorrow, and I'm off immediately after the show. I've a lot of papers for father to sign. Sebastian must take them out and explain them to him. It's time you were in bed, Cordelia.' 'Must digest first,' she said. 'I'm not used to gorging like this at night. I'll talk to Charles.' '"Charles"?' said Sebastian. '"Charles"?' "Mr Ryder" to you, child.' 'Come on Charles.' When we were alone: she said: 'Are you really an agnostic?' 'Does your family always talk about religion all the time?' 'Not all the time. It's a subject that just comes up naturally, doesn't-it?' 'Does it? It never has with me before.' 'Then perhaps you are an agnostic. I'll pray for you.' 'That's very kind of you.' 'I can't spare you a whole rosary you know. Just a decade. I've got such a long list of people. I take them in order and they get a decade about once a week.' 'I'm sure it's more than I deserve.' 'Oh, I've got some harder cases than you. Lloyd George and the Kaiser and Olive Banks.' 'Who is she?' 'She was bunked from the convent last term. I don't quite know what for. Reverend Mother found something she'd been writing. D'you know, if you weren't an agnostic, I should ask you for five shillings to buy a black god-daughter.' 'Nothing will surprise me about your religion.' 'It's a new thing a missionary priest started last term. You send five bob to some nuns in Africa and they christen a baby and name her after you. I've got six black Cordelias already. Isn't it lovely?'"


Oh and for those interested the whole TV Series on the book can be found on YouTube as seen below


+JMJ+

Tuesday, October 21, 2014

The Humor inherent in Kasper

In case you didn't know the word Kasper means Clown or Fool in his native tongue (German).

I'm not saying it's defining but it is funny

Silly Rabat, Trix are for kids!

Monday, October 20, 2014

Why continue to support modernists?

Just in case you still believed that liberals are worth linking to:


Just keep thinking Fr. Martin is interested in Truth... Pray for him (h/t Fr. Z)

Oh and then you have John Allen... he left a modernist rag to start up his own modernist rag with diocecen approval from +O'Malley.

Dont, I beg you support modernists in their error.  Pray for them and when they make steps toward repairing their error meet them and affirm them.  Meanwhile, the Franciscans of the Immaculate are persecuted and told they cant say the office in Latin... Really? (source is Rev. Angelo Van der Putten's updates from the FSSP mission in Nigeria)

Crazy times we live in eh?

+JMJ+

Friday, October 17, 2014

Modify the Orendi to Change the Credendi

Source

It is quite amazing how the material (I’m being nice) heretics at the synod have orchestrated a grand attempted takeover.  The shades of the first and second sessions of the Second Vatican Council and the similar attempt (and lets be real the success) to push through today’s novelties is stunning!  However, unlike the council in which the ultramontanists like Lefebvre only established the International group of Fathers to go toe to toe with the Bea and Suenen during the council took effect only during the second session and had little to no effect until later on. Cardinals Pell, Burke, Mueller, et. al, have effectively (for now) countered the Modernist forces [now being called Blue Thursday].

But it was quite interesting to read what Cardinal Burke had to say in his interview the other day:

“The lex orandi is always bound to the lex credendi. If someone does not pray well, then he does not believe well and therefore he does not behave well. When I go to celebrate the Traditional Mass, for example, I see so many beautiful young families with so many children. I do not believe that these families do not have problems, but it is evident that they have more strength to confront them. This has to say something. The liturgy is the most perfect and most complete expression of our life in Christ, and when all of this is lessened or is betrayed every aspect of the life of the faithful is harmed”
 The push to change the “discipline of no communion for the divorced and remarried or to soften the line about active homosexuals being affirmed in their error [see Homoheresy] is just another continuation of changing wording to satisfy the world (just see the video about Pope Paul VI from the other day I posted). But will changing the wording maintain the practice or will the practice change?  Of course it will change!

Historians of the Second Vatican Council make it clear that the discussion on the Liturgy, which was the first document of the council to be promulgated, was supposed to be the last thing discussed [read Mattei’s book on the council for instance]. But the modernist forces lead by Bea, and even to some extent Montini, knew that to accomplish a shift of what the church is they had to modify the orendi.  The Mass is the common activity (much more than an activity of course) of all Catholics and to modify it they could adjust the doctrine in an indirect way.  Modernists are not interested in formally changing doctrine, that’s too sticky and the Holy Spirit protects that, rather they have undertaken an end around to accomplish their goals, by changing the practice they have modified the faith to something more of their own heart’s desire [see Fabian Socialists].

To give another example look at how the synod is not using Latin to promulgate the documents coming out.  The modernists know that Latin being a dead language cannot be manipulated to fit their ends in an end around way, but modern language which is relative (more and more so every day) can be used to make statements that seem both orthodox and heterodox.  You can also see this in how Benedict put a stop to the neocatechumenal way mass after he was advised by the aforementioned Cardinal Burke.  Yet, under the Franciscan Pontificate the neocatechumenal movement is back underway.  So there is more double speak for you, and this should make you ask the question of if the neocatechumenal mass was first condemned, but then approved what about the novus ordo missae?  People love to say that you can’t call into question the new mass because its under the protection of the Holy Spirit.  I think I will let you read or listen to some Michael Davies on that.

The Point is don’t let the word “Discipline” be stretched so far by conservatives or liberals to accomplish their goals.  Just because something is a discipline like celibacy or communion only for those in a state of grace doesn’t mean it can or should change. 

As Chesterton put it: “Don't ever take a fence down until you know the reason it was put up.”  The Cardinals will continue to move the Overton Window so they can retreat yet still make up some ground which they did not have before.  Their initial attempt failed but the orendi is being affected because people are confused, use social media to counter the revolutionaries.

+Mary, Mediatrix of All Graces, Pray for Us!+



an interesting video from Voris:



+JMJ+

Thursday, October 16, 2014

New Dietrich Von Hildebrand show on EWTN

EWTN is hosting a series on the great Dietrich Von Hildebrand.  The first episode was yesterday but the series continues today at 2:30 pm EST.  FYI, the first episode on his childhood was excellent



+JMJ+

Wednesday, October 15, 2014

Synod participants on Paul VI

if your eyes dont bleed while watching this i dont know if your alive!





Another fisherman?

This is a re-post but again its relevant... The Orendi is being changed, pray for Bishops and especially for the Holy Father even if he troubles us!!

------

“The devil loves to fish in troubled waters!” – St. Aloysius

Contrast that with what our Lord does in in Mark 4:

St. Aloysius
That day when evening came, he said to his disciples, “Let us go over to the other side.”  Leaving the crowd behind, they took him along, just as he was, in the boat. There were also other boats with him.  A furious squall came up, and the waves broke over the boat, so that it was nearly swamped.  Jesus was in the stern, sleeping on a cushion. The disciples woke him and said to him, “Teacher, don’t you care if we drown?”He got up, rebuked the wind and said to the waves, “Quiet! Be still!” Then the wind died down and it was completely calm.He said to his disciples, “Why are you so afraid? Do you still have no faith?”They were terrified and asked each other, “Who is this? Even the wind and the waves obey him!”


Let not your heart be troubled!  The Lord is there with you at all times!  There is nothing that the Devil is allowed to do that you do not have the grace to withstand and even embarrass him!  When the waters come take up a crucifix and ask him to help bear the trial, he is more than a conqueror, for he is God!

+Pray, Hope and Don't Worry+

Friday, October 10, 2014

Like Chesterton, Kipling warned us of what was coming

The following is a poem:

"The God's of the Copybook Headings", By Rudyard Kipling


Kipling
As I pass through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all.
We were living in trees when they met us. They showed us each in turn
That Water would certainly wet us, as Fire would certainly burn:
But we found them lacking in Uplift, Vision and Breadth of Mind,
So we left them to teach the Gorillas while we followed the March of Mankind.
We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place;
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would come
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone out in Rome.
With the Hopes that our World is built on they were utterly out of touch,
They denied that the Moon was Stilton; they denied she was even Dutch;
They denied that Wishes were Horses; they denied that a Pig had Wings;
So we worshipped the Gods of the Market Who promised these beautiful things.
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes would cease.
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you know."
On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."
In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could buy,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."
Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards withdrew
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four —
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man —
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: —
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!

Too close to home?

+JMJ+ 

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Synod key words: "Graduality"

It has come to my attention that many of the Cardinals and others attending the synod have been floating around a certain term, never heard before, to provide cover and support for +Kasper.

This word is "Graduality", and its definition is related to how the Church looks on protestants and other religions as having certain truths in them that the church can affirm. So too these promoters of Kasper want the Church to recognize that the irregular unions that are entered into can bring about good fruits.

My first thought is simple:


When a religious scheme is shattered (as Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do damage. But the virtues are let loose also; and the virtues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more terrible damage. The modern world is full of the old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have gone mad because they have been isolated from each other and are wandering alone. Thus some scientists care for truth; and their truth is pitiless. Thus some humanitarians only care for pity; and their pity (I am sorry to say) is often untruthful - GK Chesterton, "Orthodoxy"

There might be good intentions and the couple might eventually be led back by natural events that occur within the marraige, that is one thing.  But lets not confuse having the Church affirm the disorder of entering into that is not a marraige by saying people can take communion because they have a possibility of coming back later.  Thats either Jesus or its not, and if it is that action is sacrelidge, plain and simple.

So Bishops and Pontiff, be BOLD, call people to take up their cross, for it is their salvation

+JMJ+

Tuesday, October 7, 2014

News Roundup just for kicks

There is so much news circulating now I thought it would be fun to do a round up with commentary... because I'm arrogant


Perhaps we need to take New Advents advice and read Nostra Aetate before we throw up. Vatican II failure analysis Terrance?


The domestic church” represented by the family, “has much to offer the wider Church in its evangelizing role,” the couple continued. “For example, the Church constantly faces the tension of upholding the truth while expressing compassion and mercy. Families face this tension all the time.” The couple went on to illustrate this with an example relating to homosexuality. “Friends of ours were planning their Christmas family gathering when their gay son said he wanted to bring his partner home too. They fully believed in the Church’s teachings and they knew their grandchildren would see them welcome the son and his partner into the family. Their response could be summed up in three words, ‘He is our son’.”
My response... check that, I'll let MC Sheen take ya




Then there is this video from CNS giving the Cardinal Wuerl time to confuse Catholics

And he pretty much replaced +Burke (by the Pontiffs hands) so we got that going for us lol


Who is she kidding?


I would be outraged but.... votes over principles (Plus who thought there were principles?)


Oh and John Allen left the reporter for .... well for another reporter with +O'Malley's support, so we got that going for us. Yippie skippie! (why do people continue to link to Him?)

Catholic in Brooklyn continues her assault on Battleship Voris... silly girl, tricks are for kids



#TwitterActivism... see above



Because you need a laugh ^^

Oh and +Francis P.P. is doing what he said he would, making a mess so yep... perhaps its organized chaos...because thats how God works right Big Bangers?



I got a chance to meet Wes and Fr. Z at the Pints and Pipes thing in Madison this weekend.  A great honor, oh and I also got to hang out with Ben Yanke of NLM so....




Oh and if your feeling down with all the bad news here is a pick me up


+JMJ+

Monday, October 6, 2014

Fr. Hunwicke: Do Vatican II enthusiasts really care about the council?

Saw this today and found it both funny and sad

Father Etiam Vaticanior 
I wrote not long ago about Fr Nominis Obliviscor; presumably his often-asserted devotion to Vatican II is what prevents him from preaching in August. While travelling North to visit a Daughter, we stopped off for an overnight break and I experienced a clergyman even more apparently totally committed to Vatican II than dear old Obliviscor. Not only did this gentleman, on the first Sunday in September, fail to preach a homily; he also omitted the Creed (and he appeared to have mislaid his chasuble). Needless to say, despite the GIRM, he also used the pseudo-Hippolytan Eucharistic Prayer II at a Sunday Mass. 
Not that this meant that we got out of Church any earlier, Which troubled my digestive tract because I had spotted an Italian Restaurant offering Lobster Thermidor. Time saved by omitting Homily and Creed was consumed by innumerable hymns (including, of course, Make me a Channel). And after the Acclamation following the Consecration, the congregation sang something metrical rather than one of the legal responses (which made the Therefore at the start of the Anamnesis completely meaningless). And after the Peace there was a long sentimental-sounding chant in which the only word I could hear and recognise was Shalom. Not being familiar with any of this stuff, or knowing the words of the formulae concerned, I found participatio actuosa totally impossible. I have not felt so marginalised and alienated by any Christian worship for many years.

Read the rest HERE

+JMJ+