ASK FATHER: Father told penitent to go to a different priest

12_08_16_confessionFrom a reader…

QUAERITUR:

Last year during Advent, my parents went to a Confession service at a parish different than theirs and my dad had an unusual situation. This particular parish has a large Hispanic population, so they had several bilingual priests available. My dad entered the confessional and he barely got through saying Bless Me Father, when the priest informed him if didn’t speak Spanish he should go into another confessional even though this priest spoke English just fine. My dad was rather upset about this. Should the priest have heard his confession, even if my dad had unknowingly entered the Spanish line?

Would that we all spoke Latin so that we could understand each other, worship in one language, and read Leo the Great, Augustine, and Lee Child in the original language. Sad, but it is not so.

There could be circumstances whereby a confessor might ask someone to go to another confessor, if there were a language barrier.

In this case, it seems that the confessor didn’t have difficulty communicating in English (though he might have). It might have been the case that there was only one priest at the Penance Service who was fluent in Spanish, and with a preponderance of Spanish speaking penitents it made sense to reserve his confessional for the merely Spanish speaking sinners.

Still, that seems a little blunt for a confessor. He caused the penitent some embarrassment (having to leave the confessional and then immediately get into another line).  Also, this sort kind of experience could provides people with an excuse to avoid the sacrament altogether and also bad mouth priests.

Fathers, welcome penitents into your confessional. Don’t shoo them away!

I hope your father got over whatever anger or embarrassment he may have felt and that he found another priest to shrive him.

Remember that priests, too, are people, and sometimes have bad days.

Don’t let Father’s bad day, or bad temperament, or silly comment imperil your eternal soul!

Review, please, my 20 TIPS.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged , ,
5 Comments

ASK FATHER: The pastor anoints everyone at Mass, sick or old or not – everyone.

last rites extreme unction anointing viaticum 02From a priest …

QUAERITUR:

Every year at this time, my pastor has a communal anointing of the sick at mass. At the mass, everyone gets anointed, whether they need it or not. Is this correct? What should I, a lowly curate, do about this?

First, tread carefully.  The care of souls is the pastor’s and you assist him.  That said, it may be that the priest is not well educated about the sacrament, especially if he is of a certain age group.  Depending on your relationship with him, you might open up a discussion with him about the Sacrament of Anointing, telling him about some interesting things you read recently.  Hopefully the priest, once better informed, will not just cave in to the false expectations that people have by now and, thus, continue to abuse the sacrament rather than do the right thing (i.e., stop anointing everyone).

The Second Vatican Council said that “’Extreme Unction,” which may also and more properly be called ‘anointing of the sick,’ is not a sacrament for those only who are at at the point of death.  Hence, as soon as anyone of the faithful begins to be in danger of death from sickness or old age, the fitting time for that person to receive this sacrament has certainly already arrived.” [SC 73]

Let us remember that Anointing was and still is called Extreme Unction… the word “Extreme” does not mean that you are giving it on a skateboard or you are using huge amounts of oil. It means that a person is “in extremis“, that is, “in danger of dying”, as in, soon, in the final moments.

Another problem is that everyone is always in danger of death. However, we make distinctions.  We are always in danger of death from, say, a meteor, a drunk driver, a stray bullet from a drive by shooting, scaffolding falling from on high, earthquakes, etc.  These are all external to us.  There are other dangers that are internal to us, such as fourth stage pancreatic cancer, a known aneurysm, the massive gunshot wound that tore the femoral artery, being 93 years old, being 93 and getting pneumonia, etc.

So, the factors of old age and illness are internal  to our persons.

That said, the law – based on the Church’s teaching – is pretty clear.

Can. 1004 §1. The anointing of the sick can be administered to a member of the faithful who, having reached the use of reason, [thus, the ability also to commit mortal sins] begins to be in danger due to sickness or old age.

This doesn’t say “everyone”.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says:

1514 “The anointing of the sick is not a sacrament for those only who are at the point of death. Hence, as soon as anyone of the faithful begins to be in danger of death from sickness or old age, the fitting time for him to receive this sacrament has certainly already arrived.”

Common points? Danger of death… sick and old age.  Not “everyone”.

 

Some of you might be saying “But Father! But Father! You really hate Vatican II! Vatican II did away with rules. This is the age of mercy! Pope Francis said so! All sacraments should be given to everyone all the time. You make me cry. That means that you must do what I want.  I need to be anointed now.”

Dear Cry Baby.  It is my job to keep you out of Hell.  Therefore, it is my job to say “No!” more often than it is to say “Yes!”.

Let’s not abuse what God has given us, especially something as solemn as a sacrament intended to help us die well.

One of the serious ways to abuse this sacrament is to administer it higgledy-piggledy.  Why?

There is an old distinction about sacraments of the dead (baptism and penance), and sacraments of the living (the other five).  Sacraments of the dead bring you out of spiritual death into life.  Sacrament of the living are to be received by the spiritually alive, in the state of grace. Otherwise, they don’t bring you all that you need from them, even if they are validly conferred.  For example, a man and woman validly marry in the state of mortal sin, but they don’t have the actual graces of the sacrament until they are in the state of grace.  A confirmand or ordinand in the state of mortal sin are ontologically changed by their sacraments, but they don’t enjoy all the benefits of being confirmed or ordained until they return to the state of grace.

Even when a person begins to be in danger of death from old age or illness, the Sacrament of Anointing should – if possible – be received in the state of grace.  If a person is incapacitated, the Sacrament of Anointing also forgives sins, but if a person is capable of confessing he should confess properly and receive absolution before being anointed.

Again, the Sacrament of Anointing, or “Extreme Unction”, unless there is urgent need or incapacitation,  should be preceded by sacramental confession of sins.

These “anointing” Masses could be a great moment for catechesis and spiritual renewal.

At such a Mass it would be good to explain what I explained above, adding what the effects of the sacrament are and aren’t (i.e, it is not just to make people feel good or feel like they belong – which is what Communion is turning into – it is not a moment to “get something”).  They should know that they should receive it in the state of grace.  Therefore, there should be confessors available to hear their sins in regular auricular confession before being anointed.  It could be a two step process.  Catechesis followed by confessions and then the Mass.

Anyway… good luck with the parish priest.

 

 

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests | Tagged , , ,
25 Comments

UPDATE: Our Saviour Church in Manhattan – “Hare Krishna!”

A reader alerted me to something at Fr. Rutler’s former parish in Manhattan, Our Saviour Church.

Screenshot:

15_11_07_OurSaviour_Krishna_01

At Dandavats we find the video:

Caption:

Devotees conduct kirtan in a Christian church, New York (1 min video)
In late September, a few friends and I were asked to organise and participate in an interfaith prayer session in New York City. Members from The Bhakti Center led kirtan for an hour.

Just thought you would like to know.

Posted in You must be joking! | Tagged , , ,
57 Comments

CQ CQ CQ #HamRadio Saturday: Calls, clubs and cables

ming flash gordon ham radio

The ultimate objective…

Now for another edition of Ham Radio Saturday.

I created a page for the List of YOUR callsigns.  HERE  Chime in or drop me a note if your call doesn’t appear in the list.

The first Ham Radio news of global importance is that …

… my call sign changed!

KC9ZJN is now…

15_11_06_W9FRZ_front_10 copy

The new card.  So, you reader hams, we need some contacts so I can send a few of these.

I haven’t made many contacts with the new call sign yet, since I wanted to wait until it also got into QRZ.com.

When I was notified by the FCC, I switched on the rig and made a DX contact saying “Whiskey Nine Foxtrot…” which cuts through better than “Kilo Charlies Nine…”.

So… that’s done.

The next item involves the possibility of setting up a station and shack here in the Diocese of Madison with a club.  At a local parish where I say Mass on Sundays there is an old school that has some storage space that can – and will – be reallocated.  My local Elmer and I met the pastor and scoped out the place.  We also looked at where antennas could go and of what sort.  It’l take some elbow grease, but it can be done.  Furthermore, I have found at least four hams from the parish who are interested in forming the core of the club, so that we can get a call sign.

Brick by brick.

Another bit: thanks to WB0YLE who gave me a gift of credit at Ham Radio Outlet.  They assign credit to your call sign and you can use it at any of their stores.  You have to call in your order, but that’s not a big deal.   I used some credit to buy a 100′ long high quality cable so that I can get my antenna down on the ground rather that on my re-rod reinforced balcony.

Look how thick this stuff is.  Whew.

Also, I solved an intermittent SWR problem that I was having with my portable SuperAntenna.   There is a whip antenna on the top of the coil.  The whip is to be extended all the way.  However, there is a little hitch in one of the tubes of the antenna that made me think that it was extended all the way… when it wasn’t.  Once I discovered that, and I powered by the little sticky part, and got it correctly extended, the SWR dropped.

Anyway, my Saturday looks pretty flexible and it looks like it’ll be a sunny day.  I may give myself a field day and go to the parish cemetery again (HERE and HERE) and – after praying for the dead to gain an indulgence (hopefully plenary) – see what happens.

That’s the update for this week.

W9FRZ (olim KC9ZJN)
73

 

Posted in Ham Radio, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged , , ,
62 Comments

Thompson on Bad Church Music (BCM). Wherein Fr. Z rants.

Sacred liturgical music is NOT an add-on in worship. It is – and must therefore be treated as – an integrating part (pars integrans) of liturgical worship, since it is prayer, liturgical music must be both sacred and also art.

The texts must be sacred texts and appropriate for the moment they are chosen.  Moreover, the idiom of the music must be a sacred idiom, or at least not opposed to the sacred.

And, as should be obvious but clearly isn’t in 90% places you will visit, the music must be good, that is, well-composed, of high artistic value, and it must be performed well.

Music for liturgical worship must be sacred and it must be art.

If the music does not fulfill those criteria, it does not belong in the Mass.

The music itself becomes prayer within the liturgical setting.  People pray also by listening to true sacred liturgical music.  It is prayer.

Some people object that “artistic” music distracts from “prayer” (or what they think is prayer).  Wrong.  You cannot be distracted from prayer by prayer.  The key is learning how to engage is authentic active participation, which is primarily willed, active, interior receptivity.

We cannot go wrong when we stick to the texts actually assigned by the Church for each Mass or office.  We cannot go wrong when we use Gregorian chant and polyphony and the pipe organ, as the Fathers of the Second Vatican Council established as having the first place among all genres of music for sacred worship.

The problem of bad music in our churches is huge.  It is central to much of the crisis of identity we are facing.  The dumbing-down of everything Catholic over the last few decades as been devastating.  Music is such a powerful influence on us. The massacre of music has been catastrophic.

In the UK’s best Catholic weekly, The Catholic Herald, there is a piece by Damian Thompson on bad church music (BCM).

He begins:

“Extraordinary how potent cheap music is,” says a character in a Noël Coward play. And it’s true. Even in church. A morbid Victorian hymn or a Christmas carol can reduce even the most cynical atheist to tears.

But even more potent, I’d argue, is church music that isn’t so much cheap as embarrassingly bad.

I can’t speak for other denominations, but I’m convinced that the distinctive awfulness of the music in many Catholic parishes helps explain why Mass attendance has fallen off a cliff since the 1970s.

[…]

And…

[…]

Bad Catholic Music (BCM for short) is uniquely inauthentic. It doesn’t sound like any other sort of music. Whether “inspired” by folk, jazz or chant, BCM has the knack of always sounding more or less the same.

There’s no precedent in the history of church music for such a clumsy cobbling together of musical ideas and styles.

[…]

He goes on to name names of some of the decomposers we have all suffered from (Joncas, Haugan, Inwood) and includes on the brilliant lines from Thomas Day’s nearly classic book Why Catholics Can’t Sing:

The “moaning and self-caressing quality of the music”, writes Day, “indicates that the real topic of the words is not the comforting Lord but ‘me’ and the comforts of my personal faith”.

Damian is not optimistic.

[…]

That was in 2007, when Benedict XVI was in his prime. Anti-BCM choirmasters were reintroducing chant and polyphony to Catholic parishes – but quietly, because there was always the risk of being shopped to the diocesan authorities.

Eight years on, how much progress have they made? In the south-east of England and certain university towns, quite a lot. Young, middle-class practising Catholics take a counter-cultural delight in traditional worship. They’ll travel a long way to avoid what Thomas Day calls the “studied whimsy” of BCM, whose elevator-music harmonies sound quaint to anyone born after 1990. Some of them will join choirs to sing Byrd and Victoria; there are a surprising number on Facebook.

But, in the end, I’m sceptical of conservative musicians’ claims that Catholic music will recover as soon as congregations discover the simple joys of of plainchant, whether in Latin or English.

[…]

We face a lot of problems in improving the qualities of music used in church (to make it truly sacred and artistic).

First, it costs money to hire good musicians. We have to be willing to stick the crowbar in and pry loose some cash.

Next, priests tend not to know much about music. I know a few priests who are exceptions, of course, but a) they are few and b) they are not young. Priests don’t get any real training in music in seminary. I’d say 90% of priests ordained in the last 10 years couldn’t name 5 serious composers of real Catholic sacred music. They’ve never heard it. They know – sort of – what Gregorian chant is, because it remains a point of contention and it was being revived in places during the pontificate (parenthesis) of Benedict XVI. But, for the most part, priests don’t know music.

Furthermore, the young guys don’t know Latin.  It’s not their fault, of course.  But – and this is a big hurdle – having been denied Latin (which law required be taught to them and the people who didn’t are, in my opinion criminally negligent) they don’t even know what they don’t know.   The loss of Latin means that the doors to the vast treasury of truly sacred and artistic Church music were slammed on them. They don’t even know the treasury is there much less how to unlock it.

Also, priests know that to change the music means having fights. The good ones already have fights to eliminate the gross abuses left from their aging-hippy predecessors and the entrenched aging-hippy liturgy team and now geriatric hippy pop-combo that likes to be watched up in front. It is hard to want to start something that they know will provoke another stream of bitchy letters from women with short gray hair to the bishop about how he is trying to “turn the clock back”, and how they want their “traditional” songs like “Gather Us In”. Of course there is nothing traditional or liturgical about “songs” at Mass and the ditties they think are traditional are laughably bad.

What is needed not just a priest who understands music, or understands that he doesn’t understand music but knows he has to find the right people, and not just willingness to spend money (and raise it, if needed), and not just willingness to fight the fights that will surely follow. No. What is also needed is a bishop who doesn’t suffer from the same ignorance and reticence to fight (or cowardice).   Bishops have to take this matter in hand. Instead, bishops are distracted into a hundred other drainpipes and rabbit holes which we are now convinced are “really important”.  I, however, contend that no fancy initiative we undertake in the Church will succeed unless and until we revitalize our sacred liturgical worship.  That means that that is where the time, talent and treasure have to go!  Revitalization of our sacred worship!

We have to be willing to have the fight.  We must be willing to have the civil war and the moaning, carping letters with their threats and tears and half-baked notions of the “spirit of the Council”.  No… now it’s of Francis!

We have to be willing to convert people to Catholicism and, therefore, risk having them walk away from us because our message is toooo haaaard.

Our architecture for our churches reflects who and what we believe the Church to be. Our vessels and vestments and other Church appointments both reveals and reinforces what we believe happens at Holy Mass.

So does our liturgical music.

A constant stream of shallow, crappy music that was bad even when it was new, will by now have eroded the faithful into something bloodless, weak and shapeless. Compound that will a church – rather, worship space – that looks like a municipal airport cum movie theatre, cheap vessels, lack of decorum, egalitarian notions of “ministry”, pointless abstract windows, constant yakking and distractions and… over, say, 40 years you will wind up with… what?

The Catholic Faith? The Catholic Faith that can help people get to heaven while withstanding the assault of the world, the flesh and the Devil?

A couple generations are gone now.  Are we going to ruin yet another?

You know what I think we have to do.

Is it too late to correct this?

Thus endeth the rant.

Posted in Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | Tagged , ,
45 Comments

Reducing Christianity to a fading smile

I direct the readership’s attention to a provocative piece at The Catholic Thing about an effective weapon perennially deployed to destroy Christianity. It is one of which the Serpent has long made use.

The Cheshire Cat

The let’s-destroy-Christianity project has been underway for more than three centuries now, but it is only in the last half-century that the anti-Christians discovered their most effective weapon.

[…]

We are living in an era when Christianity, like the Cheshire Cat, is gradually fading away in the world’s most modernized countries. The Cheshire Cat left only a smile behind. Liberal Christianity, both Protestant and Catholic, is also leaving something like a smile behind, a smile that says, “I’m a great fan of Jesus, the guy whose deathless message is summed up in the magnificent words, ‘Judge not, that you may not be judged.’”

Posted in Our Catholic Identity, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, The Olympian Middle | Tagged
8 Comments

“their absolute aim is to get Ratzinger out of the race”

I direct the readership’s attention to an interview (HERE) that Ed Pentin (of The Rigging of a Synod fame) has a fascinating interview with journalist Paul Badde who was in the right place at the right time (wrong place and time?) to learn things about Card. Danneels and the mafia that tried to rig the conclaves of 2005 and 2013.

Sample:

[…]

What exactly did you hear?

Well, I’ve been told that, on April 5 — only three days after Karol Wojtyla’s death! — a group of cardinals had gathered secretly to prevent the election of Joseph Ratzinger, the right hand of the Polish Pope for decades.

Who was involved?

I’ve seen a list naming the cardinals: Silvestrini, Danneels, Murphy O’Connor, Martini, Lehmann, Kasper and Audrys Juozas Ba?kis of Lithuania, and I had heard that “their absolute aim is to get Ratzinger out of the race”; and that they met at Villa Nazareth.

What was Cardinal Meisner’s reaction to this news?

He was upset, telling me that a conspiracy like this one was “absolutely against the explicit rules” which John Paul II himself had reshaped in his apostolic constitution Universi Dominici Gregis, of Feb. 22, 1996.

[…]

 
Read the rest HERE.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged , , ,
25 Comments

Hard views of Pope Francis from Spectators

I bring to your attention a couple hard-hitting pieces not for the purposes of depressing you, but informing you.

I’ve advised elsewhere that if this pontificate, or perhaps “parenthesis”, is getting you down, then stop paying so much attention to the news.  That said, some of you who are tough and well-balanced – not likely to fly off the nearest window ledge at the mention of turmoil in the Church – should know what is being said.  On the one side there is the rah rah rah from the catholic libs who think that Pope Francis is the 7th Apparition of Vishnu (whom I believe they may prefer to worship rather than the true King of Fearful Majesty) and those who are boo boo boo Pope Francis is bringing on the eruption of Mount Doom.

I am trying to take the longer view.  I remind myself that each pontificate is a parenthesis in the long history of the Church and of our Salvation.  This parenthesis will close one day and another will open.

That said,…

You might want to look at a piece by George Neumayr at American Spectator.  He is not a fan of Pope Francis.  My emphases.

THE POPE’S CARICATURING OF CONSERVATIVES
The lack of charity for which he condemns them was on sad display in his own remarks.

The scandalous synod on the family skidded to a stop last weekend in Rome but not before Pope Francis got in a few more licks at conservatives, whom he caricatured in his final remarks as heartless.

The speech was notable for its nastiness, displaying the very lack of charity he routinely assigns to conservatives. The synod, he said, had exposed “closed hearts which frequently hide even behind the Church’s teachings or good intentions, in order to sit in the chair of Moses and judge, sometimes with superiority and superficiality, difficult cases and wounded families.”

He continued: “It was about trying to open up broader horizons, rising above conspiracy theories and blinkered viewpoints, so as to defend and spread the freedom of the children of God, and to transmit the beauty of Christian Newness, at times encrusted in a language which is archaic or simply incomprehensible.”

Under the lightweight leftism of Pope Francis, the question “Is the Pope Catholic?” seems less and less rhetorical. Previous popes, reading the remarks above, would conclude that the speaker held to the theology of liberal Protestantism. They would find the false contrasts between divine law and mercy, upon which Francis habitually relies, pitiful in their shallowness, and they would find his constant resort to straw-man fallacies and motive-mongering against traditionalists to be an unsightly blot upon the papacy. With a pope like this one, orthodox Catholics don’t need enemies.  [Harsh stuff, but there is one point to make: it is often hard to know to whom the Pope is referring when he talks about all these horrible people in the Church.  Who are they?   I’ve never encountered such creatures.  Are they indigenous to Argentina?  Then maybe those comments should be made in Argentina.]

All the tortured throat-clearing from pundits about the “nuances” of Pope Francis is very unconvincing. He is not nuanced at all. He is an open left-wing Catholic, perfectly comfortable with the de facto heretics within his own order and inside his special cabinet of cardinals. Cardinal Walter Kasper, whom Pope Francis has identified as one of his “favorite” theologians, and Cardinal Reinhard Marx of Germany, who is one of his closest advisers, stand to the left of Martin Luther.

Well, say the pope’s desperate propagandists, Francis may not possess a deep mind but at least he has a big heart. If so, it seems to bleed for everyone but orthodox Catholics, whose fidelity to the faith under secularism’s ceaseless encroachments is treated with contempt.

Like many modern Jesuits, Francis often sounds like he loves every religion except his own. Could anyone imagine him every talking about imams, rabbis, or even a feminist witch, in the same caustic style that he disparages Catholic traditionalists? If he did, he would have an “ecumenical” crisis on his hands.

Early in his pontificate, video footage captured him teasing a blameless altar boy for holding his hands together piously. Were they “stuck” together? the Pope asked the bewildered boy. That is what passes for humor in the liberal Jesuit order. Visit almost any Jesuit college or school and you will soon encounter similar instances of anti-Catholic gibes presented as “reform.”

[…]

There’s more there. As I said… he is definitely not a fan.

Then there is a piece from Damian Thompson at The Spectator:

Pope vs church – the anatomy of a Catholic civil war
His scattershot reforms and wild statements make him look out of control to ordinary conservative Catholics

Last Sunday, the Italian newspaper La Repubblica carried an article by Eugenio Scalfari, one of the country’s most celebrated journalists, in which he claimed that Pope Francis had just told him that ‘at the end of faster or slower paths, all the divorced who ask [to receive Holy Communion] will be admitted’.

Catholic opinion was stunned. The Pope had just presided over a three-week synod of bishops at the Vatican that was sharply divided over whether to allow divorced and remarried Catholics to receive the sacrament. In the end, it voted to say nothing much. [Thanks be to God.]

On Monday, the Pope’s spokesman, Father Federico Lombardi, said Scalfari’s report was ‘in no way reliable’ and ‘cannot be considered the Pope’s thinking’.

Fair enough, you may think. Scalfari is 91 years old. Also, he doesn’t take notes during his interviews or use a tape recorder. Of course he’s not ‘reliable’. [Why does His Holiness keep going back to Scalfari?  Does he want the chaos that always ensues?]

But that didn’t satisfy the media. They pointed out that the Pope knew exactly what he was letting himself in for. This is the fourth time he has chosen to give an interview to a man who relies on his nonagenarian memory. In their last encounter, Scalfari quoted the Pope as saying that two per cent of Catholic priests were paedophiles, including bishops and cardinals. Poor Lombardi had to clean up after that one, too. Last time round, Catholics gave Francis the benefit of the doubt. This time many of them are saying: never mind Scalfari, how can you trust what the Pope says?

We’re two and a half years into this pontificate. But it’s only in the past month that ordinary conservative Catholics, as opposed to hardline traditionalists, have started saying that Pope Francis is out of control.

Out of control, note. Not ‘losing control’, which isn’t such a big deal. [Out of control, like a loose cannon on the deck of a pitching ship: it can pitch down a hatch, through the hull, and then everyone goes down to Davy Jones’ locker.] No pontiff in living memory has awakened the specific fear now spreading around the church: that the magisterium, the teaching authority vested in Peter by Jesus, is not safe in his hands.

The non-Catholic media have yet to grasp the deadly nature of the crisis facing the Argentinian Pope. They can see that his public style is relaxed and adventurous; they conclude from his off-the-cuff remarks that he is liberal (by papal standards) on sensitive issues of sexual morality, and regards hard-hearted conservative bishops as hypocrites.

All of which is true. But journalists — and the Pope’s millions of secular fans — get one thing badly wrong. They assume, from his approachable manner and preference for the modest title ‘Bishop of Rome’, that Jorge Bergoglio wears the office of Supreme Pontiff lightly.

As anyone who works in the Vatican will tell you, this is not the case. Francis exercises power with a self-confidence worthy of St John Paul II, the Polish pope whose holy war against communism ended in the collapse of the Soviet bloc.

But that’s where the similarities end. John Paul never hid the nature of his mission. He was determined to clarify and consolidate the teachings of the church. Francis, by contrast, wants to move towards a more compassionate, less rule-bound church. But he refuses to say how far he is prepared to go. At times he resembles a motorist driving at full speed without a map or a rear-view mirror. And when the car stalls, as it did at the October synod on the family, he does a Basil Fawlty and thrashes the bonnet with a stick.

I am sure that many of you have formed your opinions and that it will be tough to move you from them.  I bring these two pieces to your attention to inform, rather than to budge.

I advocate the long-term view.  Pontificates are parentheses.  Some are short, some are long.  Some are important, some are not.  God opens them and closes them according to a plan we cannot see.

I’ll turn on comment moderation especially for those of you without a filter.

Meanwhile, examine your consciences and…

GO TO CONFESSION!

 

Posted in Francis, GO TO CONFESSION, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged , , ,
70 Comments

All Saints and All Souls Masses on the High Seas!

A friend of mine who is a Navy Chaplain sent photos of his Masses for All Saints and All Souls aboard USS KEARSARGE.

 

15_11_05_navy_01

15_11_05_navy_02

That’s what we’re talkin’ about!

Pray for all in the armed forces, that God will protect them from spiritual and temporal harm.

 

Posted in Just Too Cool, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests |
6 Comments

British Confraternity of Catholic Clergy post-Synodal letter

Do you remember that a large number of priests in the UK signed a letter asking the members of the Synod to affirm Catholic doctrine?

That sounds so strange to me as I read back in the head what I just wrote. To what point have we arrived where such request even has to be contemplated, much less acted upon with concrete initiatives?

From Ed Pentin at the National Catholic Register:

STATEMENT OF THE BRITISH CONFRATERNITY OF CATHOLIC CLERGY

Feast of Ss Simon & Jude, Apostles Wednesday 28th October 2015
The British Province of the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy, at our Annual Colloquium, in St Edmund’s College, Ware, expresses gratitude to the Fathers of the XIV Ordinary General Assembly of the Synod on “the Vocation and Mission of the Family in the Church and in the contemporary world”, for affirming, in a climate of challenge and confusion, Christ’s unchanging teachings and the Church’s constant doctrine regarding marriage, the family, and the true meaning and purpose of human sexuality. We particularly appreciate their upholding the importance of the family as the foundation of civilisation, confirming marriage as an indissoluble union between one man and one woman, affirming the teaching of Humanae Vitae on the essential procreative nature of the marriage act, and the brave refusal to accept the ideological colonization of those who promote same-sex unions. We are certain that thus remaining in the truth of Christ will bear great fruit for the Church and for souls.
We continue to pledge ourselves to proclaim the beauty of marital love, of supporting faithful families in their courageous witness, and in encouraging and accompanying those who have been wounded by our broken culture, to be healed and made strong again in Christ.
We recognise the special concern shown by the Synod Fathers for the divorced and civilly remarried. We pledge ourselves to minister to those in this situation, according to the mind of Christ, and the Law of his Gospel. As pastors, we strive to help them discern the will of God in their lives, as the Synod has recalled: ‘this discernment can never be detached from the exigencies of truth and the charity of the Gospel proposed by the Church’. The discipline of the Sacraments, especially the Most Holy Eucharist, must faithfully reflect the Church’s solemn doctrinal teaching. We express relief that the Synod Fathers did not heed attempts to separate doctrine from sacramental and pastoral practice.
Finally, in ministering to all the families and individuals entrusted to our care, we note the special value of the magisterium of Pope St John Paul II, and, in particular, his Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris Consortio. We remain committed to the great work of being joyful Ministers of God’s Mercy, and pledge ourselves to faithfully follow the bold but gentle example of the Good Shepherd who never abandons His sheep.

Posted in Mail from priests, Our Catholic Identity, Synod | Tagged , ,
2 Comments