PRAYER FOR GOVERNMENT

We pray, Thee O Almighty and Eternal God! Who through Jesus Christ hast revealed Thy glory to all nations, to preserve the works of Thy mercy, that Thy Church, being spread through the whole world, may continue with unchanging faith in the confession of Thy Name. We pray Thee, who alone art good and holy, to endow with heavenly knowledge, sincere zeal, and sanctity of life, our chief bishop, Pope Benedict, the Vicar of Our Lord Jesus Christ, in the government of his Church; our own bishop, N., all other bishops, prelates, and pastors of the Church; and especially those who are appointed to exercise amongst us the functions of the holy ministry, and conduct Thy people into the ways of salvation. We pray Thee O God of might, wisdom, and justice! Through whom authority is rightly administered, laws are enacted, and judgment decreed, assist with Thy Holy Spirit of counsel and fortitude the President of these United States, that his administration may be conducted in righteousness, and be eminently useful to Thy people over whom he presides; by encouraging due respect for virtue and religion; by a faithful execution of the laws in justice and mercy; and by restraining vice and immorality. Let the light of Thy divine wisdom direct the deliberations of Congress, and shine forth in all the proceedings and laws framed for our rule and government, so that they may tend to the preservation of peace, the promotion of national happiness, the increase of industry, sobriety, and useful knowledge; and may perpetuate to us the blessing of equal liberty. We pray for his excellency, the governor of this state , for the members of the assembly, for all judges, magistrates, and other officers who are appointed to guard our political welfare, that they may be enabled, by Thy powerful protection, to discharge the duties of their respective stations with honesty and ability. We recommend likewise, to Thy unbounded mercy, all our brethren and fellow citizens throughout the United States, that they may be blessed in the knowledge and sanctified in the observance of Thy most holy law; that they may be preserved in union, and in that peace which the world cannot give; and after enjoying the blessings of this life, be admitted to those which are eternal. Finally, we pray to Thee, O Lord of mercy, to remember the souls of Thy servants departed who are gone before us with the sign of faith and repose in the sleep of peace; the souls of our parents, relatives, and friends; of those who, when living, were members of this congregation, and particularly of such as are lately deceased; of all benefactors who, by their donations or legacies to this Church, witnessed their zeal for the decency of divine worship and proved their claim to our grateful and charitable remembrance. To these, O Lord, and to all that rest in Christ, grant, we beseech Thee, a place of refreshment, light, and everlasting peace, through the same Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Savior. Amen.

Post from: WDTPRS

Archbp. John Caroll’s Prayer for Government

I haven’t stepped on the third rail for a little while, so… why not today, with a burst of fireworks.

This question about children at Mass comes via e-mail:

I enjoy your blog immensely. Thank you for your hard work. And Happy year of the priest :) I have a question about children in mass. Our priest told us it would be better to leave our children at home and have my husband and I go to separate masses so we can get more out of mass.

I love going to morning mass with my little ones and now feel as if he thinks I should not be there at all with them.

Is it better to go separately?

My feeling has always been that seeing and participating as a family unit was beneficial and that waiting until they have received first communion to bring them to mass was a loss of years of worshiping (at their own level) the holy sacrifice of the mass. 

Here goes!  (I can smell the burning and hear the buzzing ZZZZZAP already!)

You don’t specify how old your children are, but I am guessing that none of this would have come up if they weren’t of the wiggly or difficult age.

I note that the priest said one thing and you are now feeling that he thinks something else.  Take him at his word.  He thinks one way would be "better".  He didn’t say that your coming to Mass with children is bad.

I am sure you love going to Mass with your children.  I am sure that the other daily Mass participants also love going to Mass… with your children.  

Once upon a time it was not unusual for parents to go to Mass in shifts.  That was certainly easier in the age before urban sprawl in ethnic neighborhoods where it was not impossible to walk to the local parish.  These days, people tend to travel farther for Mass and, simply put, everyone has to go at once.

Surely we can agree that there are some places and occasions where the presence of very small children is not appropriate – no matter how great we think kids are, blah blah blah.  For example, I think we will agree that two year olds are not good candidates for a recital of Schubert Lieder at the concert hall.  They are not good candidates for the university lecture hall.  They are not good candidates for Charlie Trotter’s in Chicago.

But, though there are some overlapping characteristics, church is not quite like any of those three situations.

Next, I am not quite sure how participating as a family at Mass has its own special benefits if … if …a great deal of attention must be paid to the small children who are pretty much oblivious to what is going on anyway. 

I imagine parents of children will want to chime in on that point and help us out.

Children learn – at their own level as you say – from the example of their parents and pick up subtle social cues which become part of the deep warp and weft of their worldview. 

There is always an "on the other hand" in these discussions, isn’t there?

But back to an important point.  The priest also suggested that you and your husband would get more out of Mass were you not to have to cope with your busy little darlings.  Get that?  You and your husband were the focus of Father’s concern.  That is a legitimate thing to suggest, you know.  And the priest was not saying that it is bad for you to be in church with your kids.  He is saying that you might be able to participate better, be more actively receptive to what is going on at Mass, if your attention wasn’t so divided. 

And yes, I know that perhaps Father was being subtle and was really suggesting that the kids were too noisy.  But let’s stick to the story as written.

Some at this point are on the verge of saying "But Father! But Father!", with furrowed brow.  "Priests are supposed to be pro-life!  How can you even suggest that we shouldn’t have all our children all the time in every church!  You hate kids!"

"Tisk", I reply. 

I think having children at Mass is fine.  It is especially nice when they are not throwing fits. "On the other hand"... just because Catholics are pro-life that doesn’t mean that everyone should always have to share the agony and ecstasy of you handling your children during Mass.

Digression: I imagine most parents are truly concerned, anxious even, that their children not bother other people in church.  That must be – as I imagine – a real strain on one’s ability to focus on anything else.   And, even though we know that a parent still, in a way, participates at Mass when at a certain decibel level he or she takes the little darling outside, that is hardly the best way to participate.

While I am rambling... some people who don’t have children, or haven’t had little ones for many years, might be overly touchy about their personal zones of silence.  It is possible to get used to quiet to the point where noise really irritates.  These folks have to get themselves into a mental place where they can be a bit more tolerant.   One the other hand, it might not be the best choice not to leave when junior is turning purple from the screaming.  Some couples may have a really high tolerance level to noisy children, so that they barely take notice of them… when everyone else in a two block radius are noticing little else.  These people need to get themselves into a mental place where, when they go into church, they remember that they are not at home in their back yard. 

Consider also this story.

A baby was howling in the front pew during the sermon and the mother started out of the church with her treasure, passing right in front of the pulpit as she headed for the door.

The priest wanted to demonstrate how open he was to noisy children at Mass, no matter how distracting they might be.  Father stopped his sermon and said "Please don’t think you have to leave.  The baby doesn’t bother me."

Over her shoulder the mother shot back, "You’re bothering the baby!"

Yes, it is possible that, at times, parents are not entirely aware of the effect of their little bundles of love on others in the church.  I have met people who were pretty self-absorbed with their children. Therefore, it might not be the very best choice to sit in the front pew, far from the door. 

A little kid noise in church isn’t going to disturb people very much – including the parents of the squeaker.  But there are limits, right?

In sum, your priest is probably right.  You could get more out of Mass by not having to deal with your children all the time.  Still, this may not be a practical solution.  If you think Father was really hinting at something else, perhaps you should ask the priest if someone complained or if he himself had a concern.  Don’t wonder or imagine why he made the comment.  If it wasn’t clear to you what he was saying, ask him nicely. 

I will now drag my cripsy fried body to the edge of the tracks to wait for the next train to run me over with a resounding crunch.

Post from: WDTPRS

QUAERITUR: Fr. Z steps on the 3rd rail - noisy children at Mass

You might inoculate yourself against some of the foolishness of the lefties on the upcoming "social"encyclical of Pope Benedict with this piece by Fr. Robert Sirico from the site National Review Online.

My emphases and comments.

The Divine Economy: On the New Papal Encylical    [Rev. Robert A. Sirico]

On Tuesday, Pope Benedict XVI will release his first social encyclical, Caritas in Veritate. The pre-release buzz from the Catholic Left on each of his two previous encyclicals has so far proven wrong each time, [Sr. Chittister and Fr. Reese are cases in point.] so the rule should be to wait and see what the pope will actually say.

Each time, with previous encyclicals, we have been told that the pope is preparing to lambaste capitalism and call for state measures to heavily regulate it with an eye to redistributing wealth, cleaning up the environment, controlling consumption, etc. Each time, the final text has demonstrated that the pope’s conversion to progressivist causes has been greatly exaggerated. Invariably, his arguments have been highly sophisticated and have defied easy political categorization.

In advance of Caritas in Veritate, Catholic “progressives” are working themselves into a frenzy of predictions, recommendations, and anathemas — and not one of them, to my knowledge, has seen even an early draft of the encyclical which has been two years in the making. [And revision too, I believe.]

Will the document draw attention to the weaknesses of Western-style capitalist systems? One hopes so. [Because, clearly, there is room for improvement.] We might expect the pope to call on market forces to be regulated by moral concerns, within a strong juridical framework, and an exogenous apparatus of standards to curb excesses.

[Q] But here is the operative question: In what sense would such a call be a blow against the idea of free economic institutions? [A] The short answer is that it will not be.

There are few advocates of market economics who advocate a complete lack of regulation rightly understood. Every transaction in the marketplace is in fact regulated by contract law, reputation, industry standards, competition, certification and monitoring, and profit and loss systems that reward prudence and punish excess over the long term. [There must be rule of law and some regulation so that people can trust that the agreements they enter into will be honored.  If not, trade is very difficult indeed.]

Do these need strengthening? Certainly, and it should be noted that a main force for weakening them is not the market as such, but partisan interventions in the market.

Consider the drive for ever-lower interest rates as one of many examples. [Which just drives up borrowing.] This is a subsidy for excess because it encourages borrowing [yep] at the expense of saving. If Benedict writes of the need for greater prudence and caution in economic affairs, permitting interest rates to rise to a market level would go a long way toward achieving that.  [NB: Fr. Sirico is not saying that this is what Pope Benedict is going to say.]

Will the pope overtly call for a global, centralized, state-based management of economic systems about which would-be central planners have long dreamed? I would be very surprised. This is a man who has stood firm against every form of statist control of society. As his first encyclical, Deus Caritas Est, illustrated, he has a deep attachment to subsidiarity as an essential principle for a free and good society, and I would be amazed to see him give up his love for liberty because the concern of the moment is economics.

But details aside, it is good to step back a moment and reflect on what Catholic social teaching is and what it is not, so that in studying the new encyclical, we gain a deeper appreciation of its intent and scope.

[Pay attention…] Since 1870, the papacy has explicitly claimed to exercise the charisma of infallibility in the very area that "progressives" — “dissenters” is a more accurate word — have labored to dilute and “episcopalianize” for 40 years: faith and morals. In fact, Catholic progressives will find themselves on the horns of an intolerable ecclesiological dilemma no matter what the contents of the document. [I am reminded of the mordent comment of the late Fr. Neuhaus that the purpose of episcopalianism was to make irony redundant.]

On the one hand (doctrine, liturgy, and sexual morality), progressives tend to take dissenting positions from defined and binding Church teaching. On the other hand (economic and social policy), they want to boast of the Church’s "best kept secret," especially to the extent that they think it coheres with any number of secular-left platforms, while ignoring those aspects of Catholic social teaching that clearly don’t fit the leftist nostrums.  [They want it both ways.  Ignore these teachings, but pay attention to these (ours).]

It is quite a spectacle to see Catholic progressives — who in other circumstances contort themselves into exegetical pretzels when they want to undermine clear, emphatic, authoritative, and repeated magisterial prohibitions on same-sex relations, female “priests,” and contraceptive acts — morph into virtual Ultramontanists on prudential matters such as the precise level of a minimum wage.  [Bravo.  Well said.]

Let us be clear: The Church explicitly makes no such claims of infallibility on those policy matters that it considers a matter for prudential judgment (i.e., most policy issues) but allows for Catholics to hold a variety of viewpoints on such questions such as the exact size of the state’s share of the economy. [This is exactly what I am talking about all the time in my critique of the Kmiec/Jenkins/Chittister Catholics.  People are free to disagree about solutions to many social ills, about contingent moral judgements.  There are, on the other hand, teachings about which Catholics are not free to disagree.]  Clearly no Catholic can be an anarchist or a communist — but there is a lot of room for prudential disagreement within these parameters. Benedict XVI has followed the model of John Paul II in saying that the Church has no infallible model of political economy to impose on the world. The Church’s social teaching is not, as John Paul stated, a “third way.”

Further, as pointed out by my friend Michael Novak, the word capitalism is being thrown around in reckless ways these days. Citing Fr. Thomas Reese, S.J., whom Novak charmingly calls “one of our most reliable leftist bellwethers,” in an article in the Washington Post, [here.] Novak shows how such thinkers don’t even know what modern capitalism is. 

Fr. Reese asks, "If they think that Obama is a socialist, what will they think of Benedict after the encyclical?" and prophesies, "Conservatives will be shocked and disappointed by the encyclical, which will reflect Benedict’s skepticism toward unbridled capitalism based on greed."

I am not sure who such conservative defenders of "unbridled capitalism based on greed" are supposed to be. Perhaps Fr. Reese has the disciples of the atheist Ayn Rand in mind, but they are hardly representative of those modern defenders of the market economy such as Rocco Buttiglione, Wilhelm Röpke, and William F. Buckley. I think it is a fair prediction to say that any pope would come out against any system "based on greed." Erecting fictions about capitalism and its defenders — and then criticizing them [i.e., straw man arguments] — might take you a long way in the bubble of the Georgetown Faculty Lounge, but that hardly constitutes a serious argument.

— Father Robert A. Sirico is president and co-founder of the Acton Institute.

Okay!

Get ready for another battle of the Acton-Bots and the Distribu-Cons!

Post from: WDTPRS

Fr. Siricio about dissenters and the upcoming “social” encyclical

Post from: WDTPRS

YOUR NEW TLM announcements

• Best Blog by a Cleric
• Best Blog by a Religious
• Best Written Blog
• Most Informative Blog
• People’s Choice Blog
• Best New Podcast
• Best Podcast by a Cleric
• Best Podcast by a Man
• Best Podcast by a Religious
• Best Produced Podcast
• Best Video Podcast
  
• Funniest Podcast
• Most Entertaining Podcast
• Most Informative Podcast
• Most Spiritual Podcast
• People’s Choice Podcast
• Best Overall Catholic Website

Post from: WDTPRS

Catholic New Media Awards 2009 - RESULTS

... [E]arly reports indicate that the pope’s upcoming encyclical, Veritas in Caritate (“Charity in Truth,”), [what the… ?!?] clearly argues that the defense of the poor and the defense of unborn life are "necessarily linked."

Which leaves us in a quandary. Is the attempt by some to ostracize those who seek alternative approaches to the subject of abortion really the most effective—and the most moral position—a Catholic can take? By ignoring—and so minimizing—all other social justice issues, can we possibly consider ourselves sufficiently grounded in a Catholic vision of the world, even in regard to our commitment to this one?

Post from: WDTPRS

Sr. Joan’s precious insights on the upcoming encyclical

From a reader:

I’m sure this has been discussed to death (as has holding hands during the Our Father, whether it should be done or not, etc) but I was wondering about reverence for the Mass.  Or even reverence before, during and even after the Mass.

I’m in my mid 40’s so was very familiar, and was even comfortable, with the new Masses of my youth, the music, etc. Maybe it was the Church’s way of welcoming or bringing back the youth, I don’t know. But now I believe that something was lost along the way. 

I read that Catholics younger than me are thirsting for more, wanting and seeking the reverence that they do not find in some of their parishes. I seek that too.

One Sunday, whilst waiting for Mass to begin, there was casual chit-chat behind my husband and I, and voices in other places, that I felt as if we were waiting for a show to begin.  What was missing was the crunching of popcorn and peanuts in the pews. My husband described is as "cacophony" and I was later surprised to read online that there were others who described it that way too.

I understand that sometimes people need to talk in hushed whispers or that the choir needs to practice. But why is there still conversation going on while the other parishioners are saying the rosary? My husband sits in his seat with his eyes closed. That is how he prays in the church. I remain quiet in my seat. And yet one parishioner goes over to the seat behind my husband, where her friend is seated, and they have a conversation. And not in hushed tones, either. My husband later said that there was no respect. If it were the Pope seated there, surely they wouldn’t do that. I had to agree with him.  [But they do so in the presence of the tabernacle and… their fellow worshipers.]

I  have never attended a Latin mass and I don’t think there are any around here. I enjoy our Masses but it’s disturbing as well as frustrating when a priest exerts his own personality upon the mass and turns it into a show of sorts.  There was a visiting priest who said a few masses several Sundays in a row. He was very respectful during the consecration but was otherwise "entertaining". I know we are not supposed to judge but I also suppose that is precisely what I am doing right now.

How to deal with this, Father, on a regular basis, when there are others who insist on talking and carrying on whilst waiting for the Mass to be performed. It is not always that way but it does depend on the priest, I have to admit, not only the congregation.

Unlike me, my husband doesn’t care what others think of him, but I do sometimes wonder if there are other parishioners who think that we are too quiet in church. But then, are we not supposed to be quiet and prayerful in church?  I miss that. I used to love sitting quietly in church by myself (when churches used to be opened during the day and before they had adoration rooms). It’s not that way anymore.

We are culturally bound, to a certain extent.  We are people of our era and our environment.  But surely it is incumbent on the priest to help his flock to the very best sort of active participation in our worship even if what he proposes – imposes – is counter-cultural.  Even if he must strive to break bad habits, it is his duty to see to it that his flock benefit as much as possible from what the Church is offering.

Post from: WDTPRS

“What was missing was the crunching of popcorn and peanuts in the pews.”

A good story from Stella Borealis, a blog which focuses on matters churchy in my native place and surrounding territories.

This tells the tale of one of the most amazing used book stores I know and a certain (present Archbishop of St. Louis):

Archbishop Carlson Saved Loome Theological Booksellers in Stillwater (long ago) .

St. Louis Archbishop Robert Carlson once saved Loome Theological Booksellers [the world’s largest used book store dealing in books on religious subjects and theology] from the "out with the old, in with the new" spirit of Vatican II hardliners in the Archdiocese of St. Paul/Minneapolis.

Before he was Archbishop of St. Louis, before he was Bishop of Saginaw, before he was Bishop of Sioux Falls, and before he was the Auxiliary Bishop of St. Paul/Minneapolis, he was the Chancellor for the Archdiocese. Before Loome Theological Booksellers was the largest theological bookstore in the world, it was not. The following story was recounted to me by Dr. Loome just last week (some embellishments of suspense and style were added by me – but most of the story is true).

In those dark days Dr. Loome received a tip from a certain Dr. Briel at the University of St. Thomas that an edict had gone out from the chancery that seminarians were not to patronize Loome Theological Booksellers. St. John Vianney seminary was told that Loome Theological Booksellers was "out of bounds" because it sold "retrograde, conservative" books. It was then that they started coming at night, the seminarians that is. After hours the Loome family (who lived in the bookstore at the time or rather the bookstore was part of their house) would hear furtive knocks on their door and open the door a crack to let in the disobedient seminarians. The seminarians seemed to know that the books in Loome Theological Booksellers were necessary for their education. [I can solemnly attest that those were very bad days for seminarians of any true Catholic faith.  There were many casualties and expulsions for offenses such as "having a driving need to know the truth" or having such dangerous religous objects as a statue of Our Lady of Fatima in one’s room.  Seminarians had to pretty much sneak out to gather on Tuesday evenings at St. Agnes rectory, sometimes referred to in code.  But I digress.]

Although the furtive visits were exciting for Dr. Loome and his wife Karen they decided that the damage to the store’s reputation by this edict needed to be addressed. Dr. Loome soon made the call to the chancery and who happened to answer the phone, but our hero, Chancellor Carlson himself! Dr. Loome asked him why the edict had been issued against his bookstore. Chancellor Carlson paused . . . and said as delicately as he could, "no such edict has been issued". As Dr. Loome struggled to understand his meaning, Carlson further explained that no such edict had been issued by him and therefore no such edict had effect. Later, Dr. Loome learned that the Assistant Chancellor had been the one to issue the edict.

Chancellor Carlson, recognizing the great good of Loome Theological Booksellers, came up with a plan to save the bookstore’s reputation. He asked Dr. Loome, "Has your business been blessed yet?"  [Shopkeepers, are you paying attention?] Dr. Loome began to smile and said, "No it has not". Chancellor Carlson then made plans to bless Loome Theological Booksellers and invited the local diocesan newspaper to the event. In no time at all the reputation of Loome Theological Booksellers was rightly corrected and seminarians soon could come in plain clothes during the day. That’s how Carlson saved Loome Theological Booksellers and thwarted the schemes of the "out with the old, in with the new" spirit of Vatican II hardliners.

Post from: WDTPRS

Back in the day… forbidden books and seminarians

Starting October 25, 2009 St. Paul Church in South Philadelphia, PA. will offer Mass in the Extraordinary Form,  a Missa Cantata, every Sunday at Noon. 

Father Gerald P. Carey, pastor of St. Paul’s,  made the surprise announcement on Sunday June 28th at a Mass in the Extraordinary Form,  which he celebrated in anticipation of the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul.  

St. Paul’s is located in the Italian Market area of Philadelphia at 10th and Christian Streets (telephone 215-923-0355) and parking is available directly across from the church, which is also easily accessed by public transportation. 

Post from: WDTPRS

S. Philly - regular TLM at St. Paul’s

Our friends at Rorate have an excerpt of an interview His Eminence Dario Card. Castrillon Hoyos, Pres. of the PCED, gave to El Tiempo.

Here is … well… an excerpt of the excerpt…

We enter in medias res when the Cardinal mentions that on stepping down from his post he is pleased with the projects he set for himself.

And what projects were these?

In Ecclesia Dei, I set three goals for myself, and I could accomplish them. First, that all priests of the world could be able to celebrate the Mass freely, that the ancient Rite were freed without opposition to the new one, and not being obligatory. Second, to make the richness of this rite known; and, third, to remove the excommunication of the Lefebvrian bishops, and to bring them closer to the Church once again.

How did the scandal due to this last issue end?

It was temporary, but it caused much damage. They (the Lefebvrians) were excommunicated because they were ordained without an authorization, not for anything else. When the excommunication was lifted, the declarations, erroneous, of Bishop Williamson, who denied the Nazi Holocaust, appeared. But one thing was unrelated to the other.

Post from: WDTPRS

Card. Castrillon makes some comments

]]> http://wdtprs.com/blog/2009/07/card-castrillon-makes-some-comments/feed/