Chapel by chapel: Corpus Christi, London – Lady Chapel Restored

Every once in a while I have posted updates about the restoration going on at Corpus Christi Church in Maiden Lane, London, near Covent Garden.  This is the “actors Church” in London and it is also where the traditional form of Holy Mass has been preserved since the time of Cardinal Heenan.

The parish priest, Fr. Robinson, sent me a photo of their restored Lady Chapel.  It’s beautiful!

15_06_28_Lady_Chapel_Maiden_Lane_01

There is in these USA a 501(c)(3) way to donate for the restoration project!  Check out the American Foundation for Catholics, “an independent American non profit organisation and it has been established to accept donations of $50 or more from American taxpayers and to make grants to Catholic parishes (and other Catholic causes) in the UK.” HERE

I look forward to my next trip to London when I will see it in person.

UPDATE:

Father sent a couple more photos.

IMG_2329

 

Please note, everyone, the presence of charts, altar cards, and the missal is on the Epistle side.

 

IMG_2332

 

 

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark
Posted in Brick by Brick, Just Too Cool, Mail from priests | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Compare and Contrast: An Archbishop’s statement about Obergefell v. Hodges

His Excellency Most Reverend Alexander Sample, Archbishop of Portland, issued a statement about SCOTUS’s pathetic same-sex “marriage” decision. HERE

‘Simply wrong’
Archbishop Alexander Sample responds to decision by Supreme Court legalizing same-sex “marriage”

I am deeply saddened by the narrow majority decision of the Supreme Court requiring all states to license and recognize same-sex “marriage.” It is indeed a tragic ruling that will negatively affect the common good of our society, especially the future generations of children. The Court is simply wrong, as the minority opinions state. Our Constitution does not require states to redefine marriage. A Court ruling cannot make what is intrinsically false to be somehow true. Marriage, by its very nature, can only be between one man and one woman. No human decision can trump the natural law which is inscribed in the very nature of man and woman as we come from the hand of the Creator.

Just as the Roe vs. Wade decision did not end the debate over the right to life of the unborn, so this decision by the Supreme Court will not silence those of us who will continue to advocate for a just and proper understanding of the very nature of marriage itself based on the natural differentiation of the sexes.

I am especially concerned with the impact that this decision will have on children. Marriage is the one institution that connects children to both their mothers and fathers. All children have the natural right to know their mothers and fathers wherever and whenever possible. This disturbing ruling will make that much more difficult for future generations of children. For them, it is an injustice.

I am deeply concerned that this ruling will have a chilling effect on the protection of the religious rights and liberties enjoyed by citizens of this great land. It is not at all unreasonable to think that those who will uphold the true nature of marriage as between one man and one woman are going to be in for very difficult days ahead.

As I stated when same-sex “marriage” became legal in the State of Oregon:

“From the beginning, our efforts to prevent this from happening were never about demeaning or attacking the dignity of persons who happen to be homosexual. Their dignity as human persons must never be called into question or denied. This has always been about upholding and protecting the unique institution in our society that we call marriage.”

We will move forward with hope and determination to protect and honor the sacred institution of marriage as given to us from our Creator. For us, marriage can and will always be what it is, i.e. the union of one man and one woman. We will pray for all those negatively impacted by this decision, especially children. May God help us, and may God bless America.

Compare and contrast with the statements of other US bishops.

If you wish, you may post the statements – with links – of other US bishops below… without personal observations.  If you editorialize, I’ll delete it.

UPDATE: People have posted statements WITHOUT links to the statements.  I will now delete entries that don’t include a link.

Posted in One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , | 66 Comments

RECENT POSTS and THANKS!

Things scroll off the top page pretty fast these days. Here are some links to recent posts:

First,

We are obliged to RESIST! “Clear and emphatic opposition is a duty”

 

And then…

And now, thanks to donors for items from my Wish List and for your donations through subscription each month and through the PayPal button!

You keep me going.  You are all in my prayers as benefactors.

MC, DS, and VJWL sent some great stuff, including Z-Pak Dressings (I’m trying to create some super-compact, daily carry, emergency medicine pouches – just the right combo of elements but easily carried and concealed) and some CELOX First Aid Temporary Traumatic Wound Treatment (which will go into my travel pack).  Remember, my friends, “all bleeding stops!”  I’d like to be able to stop it a little sooner before another famous rule kicks in, that is, “death is a stable condition, too.” I also received some coffee maker descaler (because coffee sometimes replaces my blood), some printer ink thingies (and when are they not useful?), and a great rechargable drill/driver (for my jihad to become more holey)!  However, amazon put the wrong slip in the drill box.  I hadn’t listed on my wishlist any of Heather’s Tummy Teas – Organic Fennel Tea Bags.  Someone out there is probably doing some head scratching, and the slip about the electric drill.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Leave a comment

Congratulations Card. Burke: Happy Birthday and 40 years of priesthood!

Today is Cardinal Burke’s 67th Birthday!  Ad multos annos!

___

Originally Published on: Jun 29, 2015 @ 12:16

Today is His Eminence Raymond Card. Burke’s 40th anniversary of ordination to the sacred priesthood.  He was, I believe, ordained by Paul VI.

That was a good day for the Church.

Card. Burke is one of the kindest men alive and a great scholar of Holy Church’s law.

I am sure that all of you will stop, right now, and say a prayer for him.

Tomorrow, in Rome, His Eminence will celebrate Holy Mass at S. M. in Cosmedin. The Mass will start at 4:30 PM: Novus Ordo, in Latin.

Hearty congratulations to Cardinal Burke!

Click for the story!

Ad multos annos!

Posted in Fr. Z KUDOS | Tagged | 21 Comments

A Blog Bug squashed: SITEMETER compromised, malware

Bloggers… you should also pay attention.

Some of you have reported, when coming to this blog, the odd phenomenon of being redirected to some odd page elsewhere in these interwebs.  It is a rare phenomenon, but troubling.

Some of you have reported, and I have seen it myself and have worked to extirpate it, seeing x.vindicosuite.com when pages load.

15_05_27_screenshot_01

I think the problem has been tracked down.

For years I have used Sitemeter as a way to keep statistics here, for visits, page load, return visits, etc.  It seems that Sitemeter itself is compromised.  Lately I have been having some problems with Sitemeter.  Some days stats are counted, other days they are not.  The meter that is supposed to appear on this blog with visit counts works or doesn’t work.  For days at a time I can’t access my account.

15_06_30_sitemeter_01

Sitemeter stinks right now.  You can’t even send a support request.

So, alas, I removed Sitemeter for the time being.  Let’s see what difference that makes.

I don’t believe that any readers here would have been compromised by the Sitemeter problem.

Finally, I refer the readership to my Litany For The Conversion Of Internet Thugs.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes | Tagged , , | 8 Comments

ACTION ITEM! Milwaukee Art Museum – Anti-Catholic offense! @MilwaukeeArt

You may have heard about the highly offensive move of the Milwaukee Art Museum.  They displayed a “portrait” of Benedict XVI made from colored condoms.  That’s just plain nasty.

The Vicar General of the Diocese of Madison, Msgr. James Bartylla, wrote a letter to the Museum.  He shared it with me.  I have his permission to share it with you.  He also wrote:

[F]eel free to tell you readers that I encourage them to write to the Milwaukee Art Museum (mam@mam.org) to communicate their displeasure, with civility and respect (and with appropriate vigor and articulation), at this “artistic” display of such poor taste.

Here is his letter:

Dear Milwaukee Art Museum (cc: Communication Director – Archdiocese of Milwaukee),

As a priest of the Diocese of Madison, the decision by the Milwaukee Art Museum to acquire and prominently display a controversial portrait of His Holiness Benedict XVI fashioned from 17,000 colored condoms is very offensive to civility and decorum for the general public and is profoundly disrespectful and even blasphemous to the Catholic faithful.

If a piece were as offensive to other faith traditions or communities would it be equally tolerated by you?

I firmly stand behind Most Reverend Jerome Listecki, Archbishop of Milwaukee, in seeing your decision as insulting and callous. I was born and raised in Milwaukee.  I want you to know that I will not attend the Milwaukee Art Museum, and I will advocate to others not to attend the museum and not to subscribe to memberships to the museum.  I will advocate to others to notify you of their extreme displeasure at your poor decision.

If you remove this item not only from display but also from the collection of the Milwaukee Art Museum and do not forward it for public display or collection elsewhere, I will reconsider my decision in order to allow you a chance in justice to rectify your poor decision for the common good.

I await your reply.

Respectfully, Monsignor James Bartylla

Okay, folks… adopt this strategy and share on the interwebs.   Let’s get something going.

Posted in ACTION ITEM!, Be The Maquis, Our Catholic Identity, Si vis pacem para bellum!, The Coming Storm, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , | 29 Comments

@MadisonDiocese: 1st Masses in the Extraordinary Form

Here is some good news!

Six men were ordained for the Diocese of Madison this year. This relatively rural diocese has 35 men in formation! So much depends on the bishop.

Of the six men ordained this year, two of them celebrated their 1st Mass according to the Extraordinary Form!

On Saturday, I was in choro for the 1st Mass, a Solemn Mass, of one on the new priests.

  

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged | 9 Comments

Jupiter and Venus are having a … conjunction! In plain sight!

15_06_29_conjunctionJupiter and Venus are having a conjunction!  In plain sight!  No Obergefell v. Hodges for them, no sirree!

From SpaceWeather (and your own observation).

For the next few nights, the distance between the planets will continue to shrink. On June 30th they will be only 1/3rd of a degree apart–less than the diameter of the full Moon. If you have binoculars or a small telescope, point them at the planets. Both will fit in the same field of view, allowing you to see the fat crescent phase of Venus and the moons of Jupiter simultaneously. It’s a great way to end the day.

To find them, step outside just after sunset and look west. Don’t wait until the sky fades to black. A tight conjunction of Venus and Jupiter framed by twilight blue has a special beauty that you won’t want to miss.

Posted in Look! Up in the sky! | Tagged , , | 10 Comments

“We have two tools at hand that the other side does not: truth and grace.”

From Crisis we have a piece called “Taking Back Marriage” by Scott Rickert with my emphases and comments:

[…]

For the Christian, of course, evangelization is the ultimate solution to cultural problems. And evangelization is not the calling simply of popes and bishops, priests and deacons, but of all Christians. Each of us needs to gain a better understanding of the Church’s teaching on both natural and sacramental marriage, so that we can explain it to others, within the context of natural law and the Gospel. [Once again, if we don’t know our Faith (quae et qua) we can’t give any reasons for the hope that is in us and we don’t have a clear identity.  If we are clear about that, why should anyone listen to us?] Given the abysmal state of catechesis[the entertainment industry out-catechizes the Church by orders of magnitude.  We can’t compete with “Modern Family”.] within the Church for several decades now, the hierarchy will need to lead the way, and that will require our bishops and priests to quit worrying so much about the possibility of causing “offense” (which in secular terms means simply “saying something that someone else doesn’t want to hear”) and start worrying more about philosophical and theological clarity. [Yo!  That means that lay people are going to have to support and encourage priests and bishops!  Send notes when they stand up and speak!  Support their projects!] But parents need to play their God-given role as well. The sheer number of practicing Catholics of my generation (I am 47) and younger who have embraced the attempted redefinition of marriage bears witness not only to the failure of our shepherds to teach their flocks well but of mothers and fathers both to teach the truth about marriage and to live it in their own lives. The embrace of contraception and pornography, the easy recourse to divorce, and the pursuit of wealth and “self-fulfillment” at the expense of spouse and children all speak louder than any platitudes parents may utter about the necessity and beauty of marriage.

Obergefell v. Hodges was not the end of the assault on marriage; it is much closer to the beginning. [Without question.  Keep you eye out for new projects, such as the lowering of the age of consent… which is “arbitrary” of course, and limits “rights”.  Right?  Surely Justice Kennedy and the other four can, through better informed understandings and new insights discern a new Right to Sex with Children.] Every argument that Justice Kennedy made for gay “marriage” applies equally to polygamous relationships and even to incestuous ones. (This is not hyperbole or paranoia; read his opinion, and try to find a single argument that does not apply.) [As I said.] In the wake of the decision, numerous proponents of gay “marriage” have simultaneously claimed that churches will never be required to perform gay “marriages” and argued that there’s no reason why they shouldn’t perform them; that in itself is evidence that those who, like the Catholic Church, refuse to do so will find themselves sooner rather than later tarred with the brush of hate, and perhaps only shortly after that actively persecuted for defending the truth.

While it seems on the surface that those who have fought for “marriage equality” have done so primarily at the ballot box and through the courts, the reality is that they triumphed on June 26 because for decades they have been reshaping the culture. We defenders of marriage have been the ones who have largely confined our efforts to the political arena, but it’s not too late to make up for our mistake. We have two tools at hand that the other side does not: truth and grace. It’s time to begin acting like we believe in both.

Well said.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged , , | 13 Comments

Notes concerning SCOTUS same-sex decision Obergefell v. Hodges

Here are a few points of interest concerning  SCOTUS same-sex decision Obergefell v. Hodges.

My patented emphases and comments.

First, see the comments of Phil Lawler:

So now is it ‘hate speech’ to deplore the Obergefell decision?

The ink was barely dry on last week’s Supreme Court ruling when Father James Martin, SJ, began scolding Catholics who were, from his decorous perspective, too strident in denouncing the decision.  [Is anyone surprised at Fr. Martin’s full-throated glee at the decision?]

”No issue brings out so much hatred from so many Catholics as homosexuality,” Father Martin told his Facebook followers. He repeated the same message several times throughout the day, warning commenters that they must not indulge in “homophobia” and suggesting that someone who questioned whether we were all expected to sing “Kumbaya” was illustrating his point. So is sarcasm now prima facie evidence of hatred?

In my own surfing through the internet, reading scores of posts on the Obergefell decision, I can honestly say that I did not see a single message, a single comment, that struck me as hate-filled. Perhaps Father Martin’s email traffic is qualitatively different from mine. Or perhaps—far more likely, I’m afraid—he sees “hatred” where I see only vehement disagreement.

Is it possible to be angry about the Obergefell decision, to consider it a travesty of justice and a betrayal of the Constitution, without being viewed as a hater? Wait; let’s turn that question upside-down. Is it possible to see all serious disagreement with the decision as hate-speech, without celebrating the outcome of the Obergefell case?

I ask the latter question, you see, because if Father Martin was upset by the Supreme Court ruling, his dismay did not show through on his Twitter feed. He recommended three columns reacting to the decision: one by a fellow Jesuit, recounting how his grandmother could not marry her lesbian partner; another by the gay New York Times columnist Frank Bruni, celebrating the decision; the third by the gay activist/blogger Andrew Sullivan, also celebrating.

The recommendation for Andrew Sullivan’s piece was particularly striking because of the title: “It Is Accomplished”—an explicit reference to the words of Jesus Christ on the Cross. Father Martin, who was horrified by so much of what he read on Friday afternoon, let that blasphemous headline pass without comment.

[…]

At Legal Insurrection I saw this.  This came out before Obergefell v. Hodges, so don’t let the tenses screw up your head:

Elena Kagan 2009: “There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage”

I came under some criticism in May 2010, when Kagan was nominated for the Supreme Court, for taking Kagan at her word. Claims were made that I took the sentence out of context, was naive, or shamefully deceptive. I’ll plead guilty to being naive, but I didn’t take her sentence out of context, shamefully or otherwise. Matt Vespa’s 2013 post at PJ Media summarizes the back and forth.

Here is the first part of Kagan’s testimony, with context by me:

In response to a question from Sen. John Cornyn (at page 28 of her Senate Judiciary Questionnaire), Kagan stated flat out that there was no constitutional right for same sex couples to marry (emphasis mine):

1. As Solicitor General, you would be charged with defending the Defense of Marriage Act. That law, as you may know, was enacted by overwhelming majorities of both houses of Congress (85-14 in the Senate and 342-67 in the House) in 1996 and signed into law by President Clinton.

a. Given your rhetoric about the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy—you called it “a profound wrong—a moral injustice of the first order”—let me ask this basic question: Do you believe that there is a federal constitutional right to samesex marriage?

Answer: There is no federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage.

b. Have you ever expressed your opinion whether the federal Constitution should be read to confer a right to same-sex marriage? If so, please provide details.

Answer: I do not recall ever expressing an opinion on this question.

This doesn’t mean that Kagan opposes gay marriage. But she clearly believes it is a matter for the political process, not a constitutional right.

[…]

She now holds “better-informed understanding”, I suppose.

From IJReview:

A Mass Communion Was Given In Front of the Supreme Court After The Gay Marriage Ruling [No, don’t worry.]

Rev. Mary Kay Totty of the United Methodist Church arranged a mass communion for those gathered to celebrate the Supreme Court’s ruling on gay marriage today. The communion took place one hour after the decision to legalize gay marriage nationwide was passed down.

Methodists

As the photo caption says: “The communion consisted of two loaves of bread and a cup of grape juice.”

Yes, indeed that is correct.  That’s what it was.

On the Communion theme, from Detroit’s FreeP from waaaaay back in 2013…. seems like decades ago, really:

Detroit-area Catholic leaders urge gay marriage supporters to skip Communion

A Detroit professor and legal adviser to the Vatican says Catholics who promote gay marriage should not try to receive holy Communion, a key part of Catholic identity.

And the archbishop of Detroit, Allen Vigneron, told the Free Press Sunday that Catholics who receive Communion while advocating gay marriage would “logically bring shame for a double-dealing that is not unlike perjury.”

The comments of Vigneron and Edward Peters, who teaches Catholic canon law at Sacred Heart Major Seminary in Detroit, are part of a polarizing discussion about gay marriage that echoes debate over whether politicians who advocate abortion rights should receive Communion.

In a post on his blog last week, [2013, remember?] Peters said that Catholic teachings make it clear that marriage is between one man and one woman. And so, “Catholics who promote ‘same-sex marriage’ act contrary to” Catholic law “and should not approach for holy Communion,” he wrote. “They also risk having holy Communion withheld from them … being rebuked and/or being sanctioned.”

Peters didn’t specify a Catholic politician or public figure in his post. But he told the Free Press that a person’s “public efforts to change society’s definition of marriage … amount to committing objectively wrong actions.”

[…]

If it was true then, it is true now.

Finally, let’s remember what the CDF said in 2003… approved by St. John Paul II HERE:

In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty. One must refrain from any kind of formal cooperation in the enactment or application of such gravely unjust laws and, as far as possible, from material cooperation on the level of their application. In this area, everyone can exercise the right to conscientious objection. … If it is true that all Catholics are obliged to oppose the legal recognition of homosexual unions,Catholic politicians are obliged to do so in a particular way, in keeping with their responsibility as politicians.

Posted in One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Sin That Cries To Heaven, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , , , , | 26 Comments