3 February 2012

UPDATE 153 US Bishops have protested Pres. Obama’s blatant attack on Catholics

Over at the young papist’s place, on Catholic Vote, Tom Peters is forming a list of US bishops who have responded to Pres. Obama’s blatant attack on the 1st Amendment and on religious liberty when while he openly refuses to fulfill his responsibility under the Constitution to uphold federal law in DOMA.

If we look at how the American episcopate has been changing in the last 10-15 years, I think we can take heart. But we still need to pray for our bishops. And pray relentlessly. Consider how at the time of the Notre Shame debacle, 80+ bishops protested that cringing bit of pandering to the most aggressively pro-abortion president we have ever seen. 5 years before, the number of bishops in protest would have been unthinkable. Today there are even more bishops reacting and the count is not complete.

In any event, at the time of this writing, 116 US Bishops have been reported to have reacted with strength against Pres. Obama’s determination to force Catholics to violate their consciences in a way that contradicts our Catholic Faith and the clear moral teachings of Holy Church. Amish and Quakers get waivers from some federal mandates. Not Catholics.

Here is Peters’ list.  I will try to update it as well:  Peters wrote “If I have missed anyone please let me know in the comments!”  So, let HIM know. It is better if one person is forming a master list, and this is even more in his bailiwick than it is in mine.

We bloggers must cooperate, inter-link.

(Can anyone make a word cloud out of all these statements?)

Now here is the list:

Items in bold mean the statement was read at all diocesan Masses or included in all parish bulletins on Sunday:

SPECIAL MENTION: “The Assembly of Orthodox Bishops in North America just issued a formal statement of protest against the HHS mandate in which the Assembly, representing all 53 Orthodox bishops in North America, references their complete agreement with the statements of the USCCB.”

NOTE: If you would like a statement by an Eastern Rite bishop to be included please send me [PETERS!] the link/document or post it in the comments! Thank you. I’m trying to provide documentation for all the bishops I list and Eastern Rite bishops have been harder for me to find. Thanks for the understanding!

UPDATE: Of the 183 dioceses (by my count) in the U.S. who have a bishop currently serving as its head, 155 of them have issued statements. So over 80% of bishops who head dioceses have spoken out against the Obama/HHS mandate.

word cloud

UPDATE:

Don’t send updates to ME, send them to Peters… as I requested.  Please read the entry, above.  Thanks!

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged , , , , | 55 Comments

NYC: 1 March Catholic Artists Society

Hey New Yorkers, and anyone nearby, mark your calendar. The Catholic Artists Society will have an evening of recollection for artists and media professionals on Thursday, March 1st at 7pm at the Church of St. Vincent de Paul, 123 W. 23rd Street (between 6th and 7th Avenues) in New York City.

Father Gerald Murray, the parish’s pastor and outstanding priest and good friend of many years, will offer a meditation on themes related to the work and spiritual life of the artist. There will be opportunity for confession and silent adoration of the Blessed Sacrament, followed by Solemn Benediction and a reception afterwards.

An invitation with more details will follow soon.

Of special interest to artists – The Church of St. Vincent de Paul is an architectural gem, with a 19th century interior designed in the classical style by Henry Englebert, and a facade added by Anthony Depace in 1939. The interior boasts many beautiful works of art, including 10 Tiffany stained-glass windows. The church has a long connection with the city’s Francophone community, and was the venue for the 1952 marriage of Edith Piaf to Jacques Pills, in which Marlene Dietrich acted as matron of honor.

Posted in The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged | 1 Comment

Hugh Hewitt interviewed Sen. Santorum about Pres. Obama’s attack on the Church. Santorum scores big.

I like radio guy Hugh Hewitt (whom I listen to on 1280 AM “The Patriot”).  On Wednesday I heard him interview Rick Santorum.  The issue of Pres. Obama’s attack on the Catholic Church and 1st Amendment came up and Santorum hit a home run.

Mr. Hewitt has a transcript.  Please go there to read the whole thing and spike his stats.  And tell him Fr. Z sent you. (I really would appreciate it if you would, too.  He links to WDTPRS on his side bar under the “Friends and Allies of Rome” rubric! Fun!)

Here is an excerpt from the transcript:

[...]

RS: I talked about it in every speech I’ve given today. And here’s what I said, though, Hugh. I said that I took issue with the Catholic Bishops Conference, because Hugh, you may remember, they embraced Obamacare.

HH: Yes.

RS: They embraced it and said…here’s what I said to them. Be careful when you have government saying that they can give you rights, that you have a right to health care, and government’s going to give you something, because once you are now dependant on government, they, not only can they take that right away, they can tell you how to exercise that right, and you can either like it or not. And that’s the problem. That’s what the Catholic Bishops Conference didn’t get, that there’s no free lunch here, folks. If you’re going to give people secular power, then they’re going to use it in a secular fashion. And that’s why, you know, I hate to say it, but you know, you had it coming. And it’s time to wake up and realize that government isn’t the answer to the social ills. It’s people of faith, and it’s families, and it’s communities, and it’s charities that need to do this as it has in America so successfully for so long.

HH: Rick Santorum, what do you advise Catholic hospitals, Catholic colleges, Catholic…the centers of poverty assistance, the adoption agencies? What do you advise them to do in the face of, as Archbishop Olmstead said, we cannot comply with this unjust law?

RS: Civil disobedience. This will not stand. There’s no way they can make this stand. The Supreme Court, eventually, this thing’s going to get to the Supreme Court just like the ministerial hiring issue that was just decided by the Supreme Court the other day. And it was a 9-0 decision that said the Obama administration can’t roll over people of faith when it comes to hiring. Yet in the face of that decision, this radical, secular government of Barack Obama continues to have faith be the least important of the 1st Amendment. And I just think they fight. They fight in the courts, and they fight by civil disobedience, and go to war with the federal government over this one.
[...]

Posted in Religious Liberty, The Drill, The Last Acceptable Prejudice, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Pres. Obama “breakfast theologian”

Pres. Obama says he is a Christian.  Okay.  He spent a long time listening to Black Liberation Theology.  I think everyone should be familiar with Black Liberation Theology.  It might help you understand the President.

In any event, Pres. Obama spoke at the annual National Prayer Breakfast.  The transcript and video.  HERE.

The President’s desire to redistribute your money is so strong that he tried to make a theological argument based on a citation of Scripture.  He said:

But for me as a Christian, it also coincides with Jesus’s teaching that “for unto whom much is given, much shall be required.” It mirrors the Islamic belief that those who’ve been blessed have an obligation to use those blessings to help others, or the Jewish doctrine of moderation and consideration for others.

He quoted Luke 12:48, which is in the Lord’s followup to His parable about the faithful, vigilant servant who is ready when the master comes home. I am so glad that he did not have the temerity to quote the next line: “I am come to cast fire on the earth; and what will I, but that it be kindled?” (And speaking of Kindle…. HERE.)

POTUS wants to make this into an argument for higher taxes.

What the President seems not to have grasped is that the one doing the giving and the requiring is GOD. The context is the Second Coming of the Lord at the end of the world or our own death when we meet the Judge.

May I suggest you take a moment to read all of …

Luke 12:

And when great multitudes stood about him, so that they trod one upon another, he began to say to his disciples: Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy. For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed: nor hidden, that shall not be known. For whatsoever things you have spoken in darkness, shall be published in the light: and that which you have spoken in the ear in the chambers, shall be preached on the housetops.

And I say to you, my friends: Be not afraid of them who kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. But I will shew you whom you shall fear: fear ye him, who after he hath killed, hath power to cast into hell. Yea, I say to you, fear him. Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? Yea, the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: you are of more value than many sparrows.

And I say to you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God. But he that shall deny me before men, shall be denied before the angels of God. And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but to him that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven. And when they shall bring you into the synagogues, and to magistrates and powers, be not solicitous how or what you shall answer, or what you shall say; For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what you must say.

And one of the multitude said to him: Master, speak to my brother that he divide the inheritance with me. But he said to him: Man, who hath appointed me judge, or divider, over you? And he said to them: Take heed and beware of all covetousness; for a man’s life doth not consist in the abundance of things which he possesseth.

And he spoke a similitude to them, saying: The land of a certain rich man brought forth plenty of fruits. And he thought within himself, saying: What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits? And he said: This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and will build greater; and into them will I gather all things that are grown to me, and my goods. And I will say to my soul: Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years take thy rest; eat, drink, make good cheer. But God said to him: Thou fool, this night do they require thy soul of thee: and whose shall those things be which thou hast provided? So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich towards God. And he said to his disciples: Therefore I say to you, be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat; nor for your body, what you shall put on. The life is more than the meat, and the body is more than the raiment. Consider the ravens, for they sow not, neither do they reap, neither have they storehouse nor barn, and God feedeth them. How much are you more valuable than they? And which of you, by taking thought, can add to his stature one cubit? If then ye be not able to do so much as the least thing, why are you solicitous for the rest? Consider the lilies, how they grow: they labour not, neither do they spin. But I say to you, not even Solomon in all his glory was clothed like one of these. Now if God clothe in this manner the grass that is to day in the field, and to morrow is cast into the oven; how much more you, O ye of little faith? And seek not you what you shall eat, or what you shall drink: and be not lifted up on high. For all these things do the nations of the world seek. But your Father knoweth that you have need of these things. But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you. Fear not, little flock, for it hath pleased your Father to give you a kingdom. Sell what you possess and give alms. Make to yourselves bags which grow not old, a treasure in heaven which faileth not: where no thief approacheth, nor moth corrupteth. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. Let your loins be girt, and lamps burning in your hands. And you yourselves like to men who wait for their lord, when he shall return from the wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may open to him immediately. Blessed are those servants, whom the Lord when he cometh, shall find watching. Amen I say to you, that he will gird himself, and make them sit down to meat, and passing will minister unto them. And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. But this know ye, that if the householder did know at what hour the thief would come, he would surely watch, and would not suffer his house to be broken open. Be you then also ready: for at what hour you think not, the Son of man will come.

And Peter said to him: Lord, dost thou speak this parable to us, or likewise to all?

And the Lord said: Who (thinkest thou) is the faithful and wise steward, whom his lord setteth over his family, to give them their measure of wheat in due season? Blessed is that servant, whom when his lord shall come, he shall find so doing. Verily I say to you, he will set him over all that he possesseth. But if that servant shall say in his heart: My lord is long a coming; and shall begin to strike the menservants and maidservants, and to eat and to drink and be drunk: The lord of that servant will come in the day that he hopeth not, and at the hour that he knoweth not, and shall separate him, and shall appoint him his portion with unbelievers. And that servant who knew the will of his lord, and prepared not himself, and did not according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes. But he that knew not, and did things worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few stripes. And unto whomsoever much is given, of him much shall be required: and to whom they have committed much, of him they will demand the more. I am come to cast fire on the earth; and what will I, but that it be kindled? And I have a baptism wherewith I am to be baptized: and how am I straitened until it be accomplished? Think ye, that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, no; but separation. For there shall be from henceforth five in one house divided: three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against his father, the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother, the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And he said also to the multitudes: When you see a cloud rising from the west, presently you say: A shower is coming: and so it happeneth: And when ye see the south wind blow, you say: There will be heat: and it cometh to pass. You hypocrites, you know how to discern the face of the heaven and of the earth: but how is it that you do not discern this time? And why even of yourselves, do you not judge that which is just? And when thou goest with thy adversary to the prince, whilst thou art in the way, endeavour to be delivered from him: lest perhaps he draw thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the exacter, and the exacter cast thee into prison. I say to thee, thou shalt not go out thence, until thou pay the very last mite.

The next parable the Lord tells is about the wise and foolish virgins.

Posted in The Drill | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

“Keep your Ovaries off my Rosaries”

I just received this by email.  I wish I had thought of it, but I’ll be happy to share some of the credit for spreading it around:

Doubtless you have heard the distasteful, yet pithy and memorable slogan of the pro-abortion crowd, which they use to dismiss religiously-based arguments against abortion and contraception: “Keep your Rosaries off my Ovaries.”

It seems to me that now the upper hand is on the other foot, to quote Lloyd Bridges.

Now those who loudly decry any impositions upon their consciences are trying with every fiber of their being to impose upon the consciences of others.

Mightn’t we loudly shout in reply:

“Keep your Ovaries off my Rosaries”?

It might be a stretch to shout this at President Obama, but there are plenty of other catholic pols who could benefit from such a phrase.

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged , | 2 Comments

WDTPRS POLL: 3 February St. Blaise Day Blessing of Throats

Our liturgical calendar is packed with wonderful opportunties for spiritual benefits.

Today there is a special blessing for candles (not just yesterday!) in honor of St. Blaise and then a blessing of throats.

I once stood for hours in the church in Rome dedicated to St. Blaise and blessed people with a relic of the saint.

Please chose your best response and leave a comment in the combox!

St. Blaise Blessing of Throats

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Specially blessed candles held in the form of an X or a relic of St. Blaise is placed at the throat and the blessing is spoken by a priest or deacon:

Per intercessionem Sancti Blasii, episcopi et martyris,
liberet te Deus a malo gutturis, et a quolibet alio malo.
In nomine Patris, et Filii +, et Spiritus Sancti.  Amen.

Through the intercession of St. Blaise, bishop and martyr,
may God free you from illness of the throat and from any other sort of ill.
In the name of the Father, and of the Son + and of the Holy Ghost.  Amen.

The blessing for the candles in the older Rituale Romanum is wonderful:

O God most powerful and most kind, Who didst create all the different things in the world by the Word alone, and Whose will it was that this Word by Which all things were made should become incarnate for the remaking of mankind; Thou Who art great and limitless, worthy of reverence and praise, the worker of wonders; for Whose sake the glorious Martyr and Bishop, St. Blaise, joyfully gained the palm of martyrdom, never shrinking from any kind of torture in confessing his faith in Thee; Thou Who didst give to him, amongst other gifts, the prerogative of curing by Thy power every ailment of men’s throats; humbly we beg Thee in Thy majesty not to look upon our guilt, but, pleased by his merits and prayers, in Thine awe-inspiring kindness, to bless+this wax created by Thee and to sanc+tify it, pouring into it Thy grace; so that all who in good faith shall have their throats touched by this wax may be freed from every ailment of their throats through the merit of his suffering, and, in good health and spirits, may give thanks to Thee in Thy holy Church and praise Thy glorious name, which is blessed for ever and ever.  Through our Lord, Jesus Christ, Thy Son, Who with Thee lives and reigns, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, world without end.  R. Amen.

Grand, ain’t it?

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, POLLS | Tagged , , , | 19 Comments

Susan G. Komen for the Cure and the merchants of death at Planned Parenthood

About a zillion people were pushing me to post about the news item that the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation stopped giving money to the merchants of death at Planned Parenthood (originally set up to kill of black people).

Something about that story bothered me and I was also super busy and didn’t get to it.  Now I see that “Komen” has reveresed its decision and will, in fact, give money to the merchants of death at Planned Parenthood.

“Komen” apparently was on the receiving end of a mighty whipping.  Private institutions are no longer permitted by death merchants and their familiars to dispose of their money as they please.

At this point, I want to quote Ed Peters from over at his fine blog In The Light Of The Law:

I feel sorry for Komen, they seem like a nice bunch of people pursuing a worthy goal. But now Komen stands as an object lesson for other non-profits: run with the likes of Planned Parenthood for a spell, and just see what happens when you try to go your own way.

Qui cum canibus concumbunt cum pulicibus surgent.

At the same time, Nancy Brinker who runs “Komen” worked for and with Planned Parenthood.  No?  And because of the controversy, donations to both are up, right?

Posted in Dogs and Fleas, Emanations from Penumbras | Tagged , , | 12 Comments

Bp. Slattery’s statement about Pres. Obama’s attack on religious liberty

His Excellency Most Rev. Edward Slattery, Bishop of Tulsa, has issued his statement about Pres. Obama’s attack on the 1st Amendment, on religious liberty, and on the Catholic Church.

He provides also a video.

He calls the mandate “evil”.

I was delighted that His Excellency quoted from Leo XIII’s encyclical Diuturnum illud which I posted about the other day (here):

“…if the will of rulers is opposed to the will and the laws of God, then those rulers exceed the bounds of their own power and pervert justice. Nor can their authority be valid, since authority without justice is null.”

WDTPRS kudos to Bp. Slattery!

Posted in The Last Acceptable Prejudice, The future and our choices, WDTPRS KUDOS | Tagged , , , , | 7 Comments

NYC: First Friday spiritual opportunity TONIGHT, 3 Feb at Holy Innocents in Manhattan!

On First Fridays at Holy Innocents in Manhattan (on 37th btn Broadway & 7th) there is an all night vigil.

It begins tonight with a Solemn Mass at 6 PM (followed tonight by the Blessing of Throats for St. Blaise Day).

Exposition of the Blessed Sacrament begins after Stations of the Cross at 7:30 PM.

There are Solemn Vespers and Compline Coram Sanctissimo at 9:00 PM.

During the course of the Vigil, the Rosary as well as all six of the litanies approved by the Church for public use are sung or recited.

The Divine Mercy chaplet is sung at 3 AM.

The all night vigil concludes on Saturday morning with Low Mass at 5 AM.

It is a great opportunity!

New Yorkers: pray for our country and all your spiritual needs (and for me).

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes | Tagged | 3 Comments

Priest who refused to “Say The Black” loses his parish

Holy Church tells priests that they have to “Say The Black and Do The Red”.  We are to obey the rubrics of liturgical worship and stick to the texts.  Priests cannot – bishops cannot – on their own authority change the rubrics or texts.  In some few cases the law gives us flexibility.  In most we don’t have flexibility.

So, a priest who is not obeying the liturgical law already has a problem. But when he is called to account by legitimate authority, such as the diocesan bishop, and told to stop doing what he is doing and then that priest does not obey, that priest has another problem.

Thus we come to the sad case of Fr. William Rowe in Illinois, who now has a bigger problem than he had before and, by his actions, has hurt a lot of people and caused a scandal.

From StLouisToday.com

Illinois priest who freelanced his prayers loses his job

For 18 years, the Rev. William Rowe has done a little improvising while celebrating Mass on Sunday mornings at St. Mary’s Catholic Church in Mount Carmel, Ill. [I wonder how much is a "little".]
Now those deviations have led to his resignation in an incident that may be tied to global changes to the Catholic liturgy.

Last Sunday, instead of saying “Lord our God that we may honor you with all our mind and love everyone in truth of heart,” [The Collect.] during the opening prayer, he altered the phrasing to better reflect the day’s Gospel message, in which Jesus heals a man with a troubled spirit.

“We thank you, God, for giving us Jesus who helped us to be healed in mind and heart and proclaim his love to others,” the 72-year-old priest prayed instead.  [Good grief.]

Three days later, Rowe received a letter from Bishop Edward Braxton accepting his resignation.
“The problem is that when I pray at Mass, I tend to change the words that are written in the book to match what I was talking about, or what a song is about,” Rowe said in an interview.  [So, Father has made Mass be about his personal views?]

The book in question is the Roman Missal, a book of prayers, chants and responses used during the Mass. Rowe has been saying some of those prayers in his own words for years.

But in December the Vatican-mandated adoption of a new English-language translation of the Missal may have given bishops an opportunity to rein in freewheeling priests who have been praying in their own words for decades.
“Since December when the new translation came out, no one has said what would happen to you if you changed stuff,” said the Rev. John Foley, director of the Center for Liturgy at St. Louis University. “But I find it hard to believe a priest in Illinois would be forced to resign because he wasn’t using the exact words from the translation. It’s not a strong-enough offense for that.” [Maybe that's not the only problem.  It is true that you don't get the heave-ho for for changing a Collect.  If you change it to something heretical, that could be a more serious problem.  If you do it all the time, that's a bigger problem.  If you refuse to stop, that's a bigger problem.]

In the wake of sweeping changes in the church as a result of the Second Vatican Council, some priests in the 1970s began using their own words and phrasing in place of the verbatim translations of the original Latin liturgy in the Missal, Foley said. He said there has never been an established penalty for improvising nonalterable prayers, and bishops have traditionally [wrongly, too] looked past an individual priest’s extemporizing. [Bishops have a lot on their plates and this sort of thing isn't thought as pressing as other matters.  I think our liturgical worship is a key element of our identity.]

Monsignor Kevin Irwin, professor of liturgical studies at the Catholic University of America, said there are some prayers said by a priest at Mass in which he is “beholden to the structure not to the words.”

But there are also prayers that priests are “duty bound to say,” said the Rev. John Baldovin, professor of historical and liturgical theology at Boston College. Most of the prayers in the Missal, in fact, are not optional, he said.
Rowe said Belleville’s previous bishop, Wilton Gregory, had discussed his off-the-cuff prayer habit with him, referring to the practice as “pushing the envelope.” He said five years ago, Braxton also discussed the matter with him, and asked him to read directly from the Missal.

“I told him I couldn’t do that,” Rowe said. “That’s how I pray.”

Last summer, Rowe said, Braxton made it clear to his priests that “no priest may deviate from any wording in the official Missal.”

In October, two months ahead of the introduction of the new Missal translation, Braxton said he couldn’t permit Rowe to continue improvising, according to Rowe. The priest offered his resignation but didn’t receive a response.

Braxton did not respond to a request for an interview with the Post-Dispatch.

On Monday, Braxton wrote Rowe a letter informing him that he’d accepted his resignation.

The action did not sit well with the nearly 500 families at St. Mary’s, some of whom are contemplating a letter writing campaign to Braxton. “They’re devastated,” said Alice Worth, principal at St. Mary’s School. “Father Bill is the backbone of our parish.”

“The ways Father changed the Mass ritual with his words have only made it more meaningful to us as opposed to distancing us from the church,” Worth said. “Everything he does is based on our faith, it’s not just a whim. There’s a reason for every word he prays.”  [Who was doing the distancing all this time?  Every time Fr. Rowe changed the prayers he distanced himself and the people from the way the Church prays.]

Sad business. I hope this will be resolved peacefully.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, The Drill, WDTPRS | Tagged | 39 Comments

ACTION ITEM! Call your Senator and Representative about S.1467 and H.R. 1179

May I suggest that American readers out there call their Senators to ask them to support The Respect for Rights of Conscience Act or S.1467 (read the full text of the bill.)

The Respect for Rights of Conscience Act or S.1467 would restore the rights of conscience and the freedom of religion explicitly found in the First Amendment of the Constitution. One would think that this list should include all 100 Senators.

Click HERE to find contact information.  It doesn’t take long and it makes a difference.  I called both my senators’ offices and the call was answered right away, I ask a few questions and I gave my opinion.  I told them they should not only back the bill, but that they should co-sponsor it.  The people who worked the phones were polite and helpful.  They said they were getting some calls, but I had the impression that there weren’t too many.  So, get on the phone!

Tom Peters –  who has been doing good work on this topic – has a list of Senators supporting the bill.

Look for your Senators in this list of the Senators who are cosponsors or who have publicly pledged to vote for the The Respect for Rights of Conscience Act:

  • 1. Sen. Roy Blunt, R-MO – Cosponsored on 8/2/2011
  • 2. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-FL –Cosponsored on 8/2/2011
  • 3. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-NH – Cosponsored on 8/2/2011
  • 4. Sen. John Thune, R-SD – Cosponsored on 9/6/2011
  • 5. Sen. Mike Johanns, R-NE – Cosponsored on 9/6/2011
  • 6. Sen. Jerry Moran, R-KS – Cosponsored on 9/6/2011
  • 7. Sen. Daniel Coats, R-IN – Cosponsored on 9/7/2011
  • 8. Sen. Roger Wicker, R-MS – Cosponsored on 9/9/2011
  • 9. Sen. James Risch, R-ID – Cosponsored on 9/12/2011
  • 10. Sen. Rand Paul, R-KY – Cosponsored on 9/14/2011
  • 11. Sen. Pat Roberts, R-KS – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 12. Sen. Richard Burr, R-NC – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 13. Sen. John Barrasso, R-WY – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 14. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-UT – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 15. Sen. Michael Enzi, R-WY – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 16. Sen. John Hoeven, R-ND – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 17. Sen. John Boozman, R-AR – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 18. Sen. Mike Crapo, R-ID – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 19. Sen. James Inhofe, R-OK – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 20. Sen. John Cornyn, R-TX – Cosponsored on 10/5/2011
  • 21. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-OK – Cosponsored on 10/17/2011
  • 22. Sen. Ben Nelson, D-NE – Cosponsored on 10/19/2011
  • 23. Sen. Pat Toomey, R-PA – Cosponsored on 10/20/2011
  • 24. Sen. Rob Portman, R-OH – Cosponsored on 10/31/2011
  • 25. Sen. David Vitter, R-LA – Cosponsored on 1/26/2012 *
  • 26. Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-GA – Cosponsored on 1/31/2012
  • 27. Sen. Richard Lugar, R-IN – Cosponsored on 2/1/2012
  • 28. Sen. Johnny Isakson, R-GA – Cosponsored on 2/1/2012
  • 29. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-KY – Cosponsored on 2/1/2012

According to Peters there is a companion bill in the House of Representatives, authored by Rep. Jeff Fortenberry, R-NE (endorsed by CatholicVote). Fortenberry’s bill, also known as H.R. 1179, now has 119 cosponsors, up from 97 on the day before President Obama reaffirmed the mandate.   To see who the House co-sponsors are click HERE.

To find out what your Senators and Representatives are up to and what the Senate and House are doing, go the site of the Library of Congress “THOMAS” by clicking HERE.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged , , , , , , , | 12 Comments

Note to readers – email, etc.

I get a lot of email.  I get so much email that I can’t possibly read it all.

Could I make a few requests?

You would be surprised how many times people send me links to my own blog entries.  Please, dear readers, don’t send me links to my own blog entries to let me know that Fr. Z posted something about A, B or C.  I already know Fr. Z posted.  I am he.  I grant that I may forget things I posted a year ago, but for the most part I know what I posted about this week.

I often suggest to people who want to write to bishops or to the Vatican, or even to their parish priest, to keep their letters brief, even just one side of one sheet of paper.  If you write 2000 word emails to me, it is likely that at some point I will look stop reading and look to see if there is a salient point somewhere.  Sorry.  I’m human.

It isn’t a good idea to send me email after email telling me what I ought to post.  It just isn’t.  Sorry. There’s that human thing again.  St. Paul wrote “omnibus omnia factus sum“, but he was an Apostle.  I got stuck with “infirmis infirmus” part of that deal.

If people ask for prayers, I pray then and there.  I get an awful lot of email from people asking for prayers.  It is a duty and pleasure to pray for people in this way, even though some of the emails just break your heart.  I do pray for you even if I don’t answer the email.

If you write to me, as a matter of fact, I am probably not going to answer your email.  There are not enough hours in the day.  I just can’t do it.  To handle all the stuff I get in email, I would need a couple secretaries.  I do try to limit my time at the computer and do other things.

If those are general guidelines, here is a more ephemeral pointer, useful for today and the near future.

Don’t bother writing to me to defend Pres. Obama’s HHS attack on the Catholic Church.  Instead of wasting your time, I suggest you go have your head examined.

Finally, buy some Mystic Monk Coffee!

It’s swell!  And it’s not Starbucks.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | 8 Comments

Pres. Obama and four treaties which would harm the USA

I saw an interesting video on DickMorris.com. Here is the caption:

President Obama is about to sign four treaties which surrender our sovereignty, enact gun control, cede the power to go to war to the U.N., and tell us how to raise our children.

I guess when Pres. Obama isn’t golfing or conducting a war against the Catholic Church and the 1st Amendment, he is working on way to redistribute wealth around the globe and and undermine the 2nd Amendment too.  It’s next on the list, right?

I don’t know how to embed Morris’s video here.  You have to go there.  You don’t have to sign up for anything to be able to watch it.

You might look back at his archive of daily videos.  He has interesting comments about the GOP primary process.

Like him or not, Dick Morris is a pretty shrewd fellow.  It’s dreadful stuff he is talking about.  His point about the media not covering these treaties is spot on.

Posted in Biased Media Coverage, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , | 7 Comments

SSPX Bp. Fellay says they say “No” to unity with the Holy See

On the site the SSPX seminary, St. Thomas Aquinas Seminary in Winona, Minnesota, there is a sermon of SSPX Bp. Bernard Fellay for Candlemas. It is a real dissapointment, to say the least. Fellay said that the Priestly Society of St. Pius X is “obliged to say ‘no’” to the proposal of reconciliation which came from the Vatican.

In a time when more and more we need Catholic unity, after reading Bp. Fellay’s words it is hard to understand how the SSPX is not on a course to formal schism.

So let’s go to the SSPX seminary website (my emphases and comments):

Extract from the Sermon of Bishop Fellay on February 2nd, 2012
Listen to the entire sermon (MP3 format)

In the following transcription, reviewed by His Excellency Bishop Fellay, we have retained the quality of the spoken word.

The Society of St. Pius X has been founded by the Church and in the Church, and we say this Society continues to exist, despite the fact that there is a pretense that it does not exist; that it was suppressed in 1976 (but obviously with total disrespect of the laws of the Church itself). [I know he believes that, but I don't think that is true.] And that’s why we continue. And our dear Founder insisted many, many times on the importance of this existence of the Society. And I think, as time evolves, we must keep this in mind – and it is very important that we keep this Catholic Spirit. [Which doesn't, apparently, include unity with Peter.]

We are not an independent group. [It may be harder to make that claim after this sermon.] Even if we are fighting with Rome, we are still, so to say, with Rome. We are fighting with Rome; or, if you want, against Rome, at the same time with Rome. And we claim and we continue to say, we are Catholic. We want to stay Catholic. Many times I say to Rome, you try to kick us out. [?] And we see it would be much easier for us to be out. We would have many more advantages. You would treat us much better! Look at the Protestants, how they open the churches to them. [He has a good point there!] To us, they close them. And we say, we don’t care. We do things in front of God. We suffer from the Church, fine. We don’t like that, of course. But we ought to stay there in the truth. And we have to maintain that we do belong to the Church. We are Catholics. We want to be and we want to stay Catholic, and it is very important to maintain that.

It’s also important that we don’t finally imagine a Catholic church which is just the fruit of our imagination but which is no longer the real one. [Which is not the fruit of their imagination?] And with the real one we have problems. That’s what makes it even more difficult: the fact that we have problems with it. That does not allow us, so to say, to shut the door. On the contrary, it is our duty to continuously go there, knock at the door, and not beg that we may enter (because we are in) but beg that they may convert; that they [THEY] may change and come back to what makes the Church. It is a great mystery; [No, it is something, I'll grant that, but it isn't a mystery.] it is not simple. Because at the same time we have to say, yes, we do recognize that Church – that’s what we say in the Creed, I believe in the Catholic Church – so we accept that there is a pope; we accept that there is a hierarchy, we do accept that.

And practically, at many levels, we have to say no. Not because it does not please us, but because the Church has already spoken about that. Even many of these things it has condemned them. And so, in our discussions with Rome we were, so to say, stuck there. The key problem in our discussions with Rome was really the Magisterium, the teaching of the Church. Because they say, “we are the pope, we are the Holy See” – and we say, yes. And so they say, “we have the supreme power,” and we say, yes. They say, “we are the last instance in teaching and we are necessary” – Rome is necessary for us to have the Faith, and we say, yes. And then they say, “then, obey.” And we say, no. And so they say to us, you are protestant. [?] You put your reason above the Magisterium of today. And we answer to them, you are Modernists. You pretend that the teaching of today can be different from the teaching of yesterday. We say, when we adhere to what the Church has taught yesterday, we, by necessity, adhere to the teaching of the Church today. [So what is the problem?] Because the truth is not linked to time. The truth is above it. What has been said once is binding all times. These are the dogmas. [Are they claiming that everything they disagree with Rome about is a dogma?  The SSPS disagrees with Rome about dogma?  Is Rome not being faithful to some dogma?  Does Bp. Fellay and the SSPX now determine what is dogma and what isn't and how it is to be expressed and what to believe?] God is like that; God is above time. And the Faith is adhering to the truth of God. It’s above time. That’s why the church of today is bound and has to be like (not only like) the Church of yesterday. And so when you see the present pope say that there must be continuity in the Church, we say, of course! That is what we have said at all times. When we talk about tradition, that’s precisely the meaning. They say, there must be Tradition, there must be continuity. So there is continuity. Vatican II has been made by the Church, the Church must be continuous, so Vatican II is Tradition. And we say, beg your pardon? [To what point was he playing to the crowd?]

It goes even further, my dear brethren. That was during the discussion. At the end of the discussion, comes this invitation from Rome. In this invitation there is a proposition of a canonical situation that is to regularize our situation. [Did you get that?  Rome offered them something concrete.] And I may say, what is presented today, which is already different from what was presented on the 14th of September, we can consider it as all right, good. They fulfilled all our requirements, I may say, on the practical level. So there is not much problem there. The problem remains at the other level – at the level of the doctrine. But even there it goes very far – very far, my dear brethren. The key is a principle. Which they say, “this you must accept; you must accept that for the points that make difficulty in the Council – points which are ambiguous, where there is a fight – these points, like ecumenism, like religious liberty, these points must be understood in coherence with the perpetual teaching of the Church.” “So if there is something ambiguous in the Council, you must understand it as the Church has always taught throughout the ages.”  [Go back and read that again, if you have to.]

They go even further and say, “one must reject whatever is opposed to this traditional teaching of the Church.” Well, that is what we have always said. Amazing, isn’t it? That Rome is imposing on us this principle. Amazing. [No, it isn't amazing.  The Holy See would do that with anyone.  It is a Roman thing to make sure all i's are dotted and t's crossed.  You see to details on both sides of the issues: "accept what we accept and reject what we reject".] Then you may wonder, then why don’t you accept? Well, my dear brethren, there is still a problem. The problem is that in this text they give two applications of what and how we have to understand these principles. These two examples that they give to us are ecumenism and religious liberty, as they are described in the new Catechism of the Catholic Church, which are exactly the points for which we reproach the Council.  [So, we can extrapolate from this that they - like the Anglicans when they received Anglicanorum coetibus - were really only asked to accept the Catechism of the Catholic Church?]

In other words, Rome tells us, we have done that all the time. We are traditional; Vatican II is Tradition. Religious liberty, ecumenism is Tradition. It is in full coherence with Tradition. You just wonder, where do we go? What kind of words will we find to say, we agree or we don’t? If even the principles which we have kept and said, they say, yes it’s ok you can say that, because this means what we mean, which is exactly the contrary of what we mean.

I think we could not go further in the confusion. In other words, my dear brethren, that means that they have another meaning with the word “tradition,” and even maybe even with “coherence.” [The SSPX gets to decide what "tradition" is apart from Rome?] And that’s why we were obliged to say no. We’re not going to sign that. We agree with the principle but we see that the conclusion is contrary. Great mystery! Great mystery! [No.  Whatever this is, it isn't a mystery.] So what is going to happen now? Well, we have sent our answer to Rome. They still say that they’re reflecting on it, which means they’re probably embarrassed.  [And that could be rash judgment on his part, in a public sermon, which is scandal.] At the same time I think we may see now what they really want. Do they really want us in the Church or not? We told them very clearly, if you accept us as is, without change, without obliging us to accept these things, then we are ready. [That has always been my point of view, btw.  That which they disagree about is so hard to figure out that there should be room for the SSPX view.  But it is not proper for them to impose their view on Rome, which actually has authority to teach, which the SSPX entirely lacks.] But if you want us to accept these things, we are not. In fact we have just quoted Archbishop Lefebvre who said this already in 1987 – several times before, but the last time he said it was in 1987.

In other words, my dear brethren, humanly speaking, difficult to say how the future will look, but we know that when we deal with the Church, we deal with God; we deal with divine providence, and we know that this Church is His Church. Humans may cause some disruption, some destruction. They may cause turmoil, but God is above that, and He knows how to, out of all these happenings – these human happenings – these odd lines, God knows how to direct His Church through these trials.

There will be an end to this trial, I don’t know when. Sometimes there is hope that it will come. Sometimes it is like despair. God knows when, but really, humanly speaking, we must wait for quite a time before hoping to see things better – five, ten years. I am persuaded that in ten years things will look different because the generation of the Council will be gone and the next generation does not have this link with the Council. And already now we hear several bishops, my dear brethren, several bishops tell us: you give too much weight to this Council; put it aside. It could be a good way for the Church to go ahead. Put it aside; forget it. Let’s go back to the real thing, to Tradition. [Okay.]

Isn’t that interesting to hear bishops who say that? That’s a new language! It means that you have a new generation which knows that there are things that are more serious than Vatican II in the Church, and that we have to go back to this more serious, if I may say so. Vatican II is serious because of the damage it has caused, yes it is. But as such it wanted to be a pastoral council, which is over now. We know that someone who is working in the Vatican wrote a thesis for his academic grades and it was about the magisterium of Vatican II. He himself told us and nobody in the Roman universities was ready to take that thesis. Finally a professor did, and the thesis is the following: the authority of the magisterium of Vatican II is that of a homily in the 1960’s. And he passed!

We shall see my dear brethren. For us it’s very clear. We must stick and hold to the truth, to the Faith. We are not going to give that up – whatever happens. There are some threats, of course, from Rome now. We shall see. We put all these things in the hands of God, and in the hands of the Blessed Virgin Mary. Oh, yes, we have to continue our crusade of rosaries. We count on her, we count on God. And then whatever happens, happens. I cannot promise a beautiful spring. I have no idea what’s going to be in this spring. What I know is that the fight for the faith will continue, whatever happens. If we are recognized or not, you can be certain that the Progressives will not be happy. [Oh yah?  Today is like Christmas morning for them, I fear.] They will continue and we will continue to fight them too.

Posted in One Man & One Woman | Tagged , | 66 Comments

Snowy St. Peter’s Square: video

Snowy St. Peter’s Square

Click HERE for live webcam.

Posted in Just Too Cool | 5 Comments