Benedict XVI to change mind on women’s ordination? Have stranger things ever happened?

I picked this up from Eye Of The Tiber. I didn’t hear about this epoch-changing story in the MSM or the Catholic blogosphere, did you?

Hmmmm….  perhaps there is a conspiracy.

Former LCWR President’s Dynamic Speech May Change Pope’s Mind On Female Ordination

ROME––Former President of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious, Pat Ferrell, delivered an electrifying speech yesterday to Pope Benedict XVI and top Church officials regarding the necessity of female priests. Many Vatican analysts now believe the speech will be the catalyst to female ordination. “It was one of the most insightful…one of the most profound talks since John Paul II gave the address that helped bring down communism,” an aide close to the Pontiff said, choking up. In an amateur video shot by one insider, Ferrell can be seen with tears in her eyes as she walks away from the podium after giving her address. The Pontiff, visibly moved by the passionate speech, stands with tears in his eyes and begins to clap, slowly. Gradually, his aides, one after another one, rise to their feet and begin to clap, louder and louder until the entire antechamber is filled with thunderous and uproarious shouts and whistles, as all begin to cheer, “Fe-rrell…Fe-rrell…Fe-rrell…”

I guess we all better make some adjustments.

I, for one, welcome our new female overlords.

Posted in Lighter fare, Women Religious | Tagged , , ,
59 Comments

Pres. Obama’s wedding ring

Here is something very interesting from WND:

NEW YORK – As a student at Harvard Law School, then-bachelor Barack Obama’s practice of wearing a gold band on his wedding-ring finger puzzled his colleagues.

Now, newly published photographs of Obama from the 1980s show that the ring Obama wore on his wedding-ring finger as an unmarried student is the same ring Michelle Robinson put on his finger at the couple’s wedding ceremony in 1992.

Moreover, according to Arabic-language and Islamic experts, the ring Obama has been wearing for more than 30 years is adorned with the first part of the Islamic declaration of faith, the Shahada: “There is no God except Allah.”

The Shahada is the first of the Five Pillars of Islam, expressing the two fundamental beliefs that make a person a Muslim: There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is Allah’s prophet.

Sincere recitation of the Shahada is the sole requirement for becoming a Muslim, as it expresses a person’s rejection of all other gods

Egyptian-born Islamic scholar Mark A. Gabriel, Ph.D., examined photographs of Obama’s ring at WND’s request and concluded that the first half of the Shahada is inscribed on it.

“There can be no doubt that someone wearing the inscription ‘There is no god except Allah’ has a very close connection to Islamic beliefs, the Islamic religion and Islamic society to which this statement is so strongly attached,” Gabriel told WND.

[…]

Read the rest there.  There are many interesting photos.

Intriguing!

Posted in The Drill | Tagged , , , , , ,
56 Comments

QUAERITUR: Can a traditionalist priest require women to cover their heads during Mass?

From a reader:

I have read web sites from FSSP Traditional parishes that indicate women are to cover their heads during Mass. My understanding is that the requirement was removed from Canon Law, thus it is no longer a sin to not cover. However, if a traditionalist priest made it a requirement for his parish, or for his congregation in the case of a quasi-parish, would the woman sin by disobedience if she refused to cover her head, and could a priest make it a requirement in order to, for example, receive communion?

I am glad that this is only a hypothetical question and that no priest has been foolish enough to deny women Communion if they had no head covering.

News of that sort, if true, would provoke The Wrath Of The Whatever From High Atop The Thing.

Univerase Ecclesiae 28, which clarified some points of Summorum Pontificum, stated that those rubrical things and practices in force in 1962 which were in the Missale Romanum were to be maintained now.  Thus, no Communion in the hand, no altar girls, etc. Summorum Pontificum did not revive the canon of the old, 1917 Code of Canon Law concerning head coverings.

I think a case can be made that during celebrations of Holy Mass with the 1962 Missale Romanum it is good that women cover their heads.  As a matter of fact, why limit that to the 1962MR?  Let’s apply that the Ordinary Form as well!   That said, there is no law on the books right now that obliges women to cover their heads during Mass.   But think: New Evangelization…. Year of Faith… New Evangelization… Year of Faith….

So, while there is no strict obligation according to the law, the ethos of the older use of the Roman Rite creates a soft obligation, an environment in which people will of their own free will conform to what the older use is about.  That suggests a willingness on the part of women to use a head-covering in church.  It does not impose any hard obligation.  I don’t think anyone should look cross-eyed at a woman with an uncovered head in church for the Extraordinary Form.  That would be boorish.

Were I to hear that a priest would not give Communion to a woman for the sole reason that she was not wearing a head covering… well… let’s just hope that never happens.

Anyway… ladies… promote the New Evangelization during the Year of Faith and start wearing those chapel veils in church!





Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, Universae Ecclesiae | Tagged , , , , , ,
45 Comments

Is something being done about the “homosexual Masses” in London?

I picked this up from Marco Tossati at Vatican Insider – in Italian – about the homosexual Masses being celebrated in London in the Soho district at the Church of Our Lady of the Assumption and Saint Gregory (not at St. Patrick’s on Soho Square itself):

Messa gay a Londra, si muove la Dottrina della Fede (“Gay” Mass in London, the [Congregation for] the Doctrine of the Faith makes a move)

The offices of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith have decided to deal with the problem of services celebrated in the district of Soho in the British capital

The new Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, (Archbishop) Gerhard Ludwig Mueller, intends, very firmly, to deal with the problem of the Mass which twice a month is celebrated in London, Warwick Street in Soho for homosexuals, lesbians, bisexuals and transgendered, with the approval of the Archbishop of Westminster, (Archbishop) Vincent Nichols. It seems that already in the recent past other dicasteries of the Roman Curia, at the request and solicitation of London Catholics, have asked for clarifications and have underscored the concerns connected with an initiative of this kind. Among other things, an expert on liturgy and theology noted that there is a danger that the initiative will lead to a ghetto-ization of the persons involved.

What bothers the sensibilities of London Catholics in the quarter and nearby area, is the form in which the Mass is celebrated. In the petition sent to (Archbishop) Nichols some time ago, and in copies sent also to some Roman congregations, there is a complaint that homilies are given that seem to justify behaviors considered wrong in the doctrine of the Church.

[…]

There is more there, but that’s what I have time for right now.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Brick by Brick, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, The future and our choices | Tagged , ,
17 Comments

“I want to share why I choose to wear a veil… and why I love it.”

At the blog Fide Et Literis: By Faith & Learning there is a post entitled I love my chapel veil.

She wrote:

I recently read an article about the comeback of chapel veils entitled, “Head covering is thinly veiled patriarchy.” The author wrote to call out what us veil-wearers don’t seem to see – that “Catholics are not the Amish,” that this trend is anti-feminist, and that wearing a veil is “downright repressive.”

What I’d like to share is that I’m not a barefoot kitchen slave because I wear a veil, nor do I feel repressed as a woman. I want to share why I choose to wear a veil… and why I love it.

My first encounter with veiling happened when my husband and I were visiting my out-of-town sister-in-law about a year ago. We joined her family for Tridentine Mass one Sunday and it was only my first or second time ever attending the traditional Mass. My 12-year-old niece offered me a veil to borrow on our way there, noticeably excited to be able to share something precious of hers with her super cool soon-to-be aunt. I declined her offer. I’d never worn a veil before and really my only thought was, “This is weird.”

[…]

You can read the rest there.

Ah, the New Evangelization!

I will now back out of the room.

Posted in Just Too Cool, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , ,
42 Comments

The Holy Father’s Wednesday Audiences will now include Arabic

ARABIC TO BECOME A PART OF THE POPE’S GENERAL AUDIENCE

Vatican City, (VIS) – Beginning on Wednesday 10 October, during the Holy Father’s weekly general audience, an Arabic speaker will join the other speakers who provide a summary of the papal catechises in various different languages.

In this way, in the wake of his recent trip to Lebanon and the publication of the Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation “Ecclesia in Medio Oriente”, the Holy Father intends to express his perpetual concern and support for Christians in the Middle East, and to remind everyone of their duty to pray and work for peace in the region.

A couple problems I can see with this are a) the audience will be longer and b) if they end using Arabic, some Arab-speakers will take it as an insult.

Sts. Nunil0 and Alodia, pray for us!

BTW… 22 October is the Feast of Sts. Nunilo and Alodia! Start planning.

Posted in Benedict XVI | Tagged , ,
6 Comments

The Synod so far: something missing….

As you know, the Synod of Bishops in meeting in Rome, again.  The theme this time: The New Evangelization for the Transmission of the Christian Faith

So far in the interventions (speeches) HERE I have not yet seen any mention of the internet.

“But Father! But Father!”, you might be tempted to interject, “The Synod is barely underway!”

I’m just sayin’.

Our time has been called “information age” by Bl. John Paul II and, according to Benedict XVI we live on a “digital continent”.

Also, are there good Twitter hashtags for news of the Synod?  #synod ? #bishops

UPDATE 10 October 1318 GMT

Archbishop Kurtz of Louisville, a participant in the Synod, is posting to a blog about his experience.  HERE.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged
4 Comments

Jon O’Brien’s (“catholics For Choice”) spittle-flecked nutty in HuffPo about Sr. Walsh’s remarks

HuffPo has posted a spittle-flecked nutty from  Jon O’Brien, president of the disgusting pro-abortion catholic group, Catholics … catholics For Choice.

O’Brien’s nutty was sparked by a post on the USCCB blog by Sr. Mary Ann Walsh.

Sr. Walsh wrote:

“Going to Catholics for Choice for a so-called Catholic view is like asking Catholic Atheists (yet to exist, I think) to opine on the meaning of God.”

Heh heh. Kudos.  Sr. Walsh’s entirely appropriate remark got under O’Brien’s skin.  Perhaps O’Brien has yet a trace of guilt for promoting immoral things.  I don’t know.

Sr. Walsh pointed to the fact that catholics For Choice are catholic in name only.  They hijacked the descriptive word “Catholic” for the title of their politically oriented organization.

They must not be given a free pass.  Sr. Walsh spoke up.  O’Brien lashed out in HuffPo.

You might enjoy reading O’Brien’s nervous reaction in its entirely, HERE.  Make some popcorn.

Leaving aside most of O’Brien’s piece, let’s focus on one point, in keeping with his title: “Nobody Gets to Say Who Is and Who Is Not Catholic”.  He wrote:

As somebody intimately familiar with the ways of the church, Sister Mary Ann knows that nobody gets to say who is and who is not Catholic. Not the priests, not the bishops and not the pope. One is a Catholic after baptism. Period. She might have her own opinions about who is a good Catholic or a bad Catholic, but her claims that we aren’t Catholic needs some fact-checking.

He’s right, of course.  Even excommunicated people are still Catholics.   Perhaps O’Brien should be excommunicated.  He perhaps could use some practical knowledge rather than just theoretical knowledge about his catholic identity.  Think of the authority being excommunicated would give him with his acolytes!

O’Brien also wrote:

 And as to my Catholicism, perhaps I’ll send her copy of my baptismal certificate, though I doubt she’d [Sr. Walsh] be appeased.

He has a baptismal certificate!  I guess he wins the argument with that one.  On the other hand, each and every priest who sexually abused children have baptismal certificates.  They are still Catholics, even in jail.

Baptized catholics remain baptized catholics in Hell, too.

The Church does, in fact, get to determine who is in communion with her and who is not.  The Church’s shepherds do, in fact, get to determine who can and can’t use the term “Catholic” in the names of their organization.  We all, in fact, get to form opinions about the catholicity of individuals and of organizations based on what they say and what they do.

I don’t think those priests – and nuns – who abused children were very Catholic in their actions.

catholics For Choice promotes abortion.  Killing children.  That doesn’t sound very Catholic to me.

O’Brien also wrote:

 As Catholics we take seriously our obligations to know and thoughtfully consider Catholic teaching. And in coming to our positions on abortion, family planning and other issues we have done so, and continue to do so. We didn’t make this up. We’ve got saints, cardinals, theologians and millions of Catholics on our side.

No, Jon, you are making this up.  Whom are you trying kid?  Catholics cannot in good conscience condone abortion.  Catholics cannot in good conscience promote abortion.

I doubt the saints O’Brien claims would be pleased to be counted as being on his side.  I hope those saints are asking God to grant O’Brien the graces needed for his conversion.  But wait!  On his side he also has “cardinals, theologians and millions of Catholics”?  BIG DEAL.  They have theologians on their side!  Wow!  Cardinals, too?  I’m sooo impressed!  Millions of Catholics?  That clinches it!

While I’m at it, O’Brien wrote:

“The church’s brand control over individuals ends the minute a person is baptized. From that point forward, we have the right — and the responsibility — to speak as Catholics on matters of social justice, including those that involve sex, sexuality and reproduction.”

Aside from the clear point in Catholic teaching that obedience is due to the Magisterium of bishops on matters of defined Catholic teachings, O’Brien must explain why his statement limits Catholics’ right and responsibility to dissent to “matters of social justice, including those that involve sex…”? What about their right and responsibility to dissent from other Catholic teachings, such as the divinity of Jesus, or the exclusive role of Christ in human salvation, or the trinitarian nature of God, or Mary’s role as Mother of God? What makes social justice such a privileged category for dissent?

catholics for Choice is dead wrong.  They promote evil and they claim that people can choose evil in good conscience.  Does that sound Catholic to you?

Holy Church has marks by which we recognize who she is.  These marks help us to know that we belong to the Church Christ founded, and not some reduced Church or some mere ecclesial community.  In a similar way, we can draw conclusions about Catholic identity, the catholicity of Catholics, by noting carefully and fairly both their words and deeds.   There is a great deal flexibility in this matter.  People make mistakes and, of course, remain Catholics.   People sin and remain Catholics.  The Church corrects them and they adjust their lives.  If erring people persist in their errors or sins after proper correction, then Holy Church can impose censures on them.  The Church can and does issue statements about those people or groups.  The Church can, in fact, say that people are not in communion with her or that they are in serious error.

Our tent is actually pretty big.  It is possible, however, to stray out of the tent.

I think O’Brien and catholics For Choice have strayed from the tent.  They stand in direct opposition to the Church’s clear moral teaching on a range of things, including the intrinsic evil of abortion.  They stand in direct opposition to the Church’s duly appointed shepherds, successors of the Apostles.

The USCCB should issue a clear, brief statement that catholics For Choice may not use the identifying term “Catholic” in the name of their anti-Catholic organization.

In the meantime…

CLICK TO GET CAN. 915 STUFF

Posted in 1983 CIC can. 915, Biased Media Coverage, Emanations from Penumbras, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , , ,
16 Comments

Fr. John Hunwicke – redivivus

I was delighted to see an old RSS feed come back to life today after a long hiatus.

Fr. John Hunwicke, now a Catholic priest, has resumed posting to his blog now called Fr Hunwicke’s Mutual Enrichment, though it has the old URL address.

You might drop in or resubscribe.

Posted in Linking Back, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests | Tagged
4 Comments

Reason #756 for why Anglicans must issue “Romanorum coetibus”

On his way out, Anglican Archbp. Rowan Williams really has to get his crew to issue Romanorum coetibus.  No, really.   They are so very… progressive.  They are so far ahead of us Catholics.

For example, I read in The Daily Telegraph that the Anglicans are trying to appeal to young people by having – I am not making this up – liturgical fashion shows.  No, really.

More teal vicar? Colourful clergy show off new robes on catwalk
It may shock traditionalists but vicars have taken to the catwalk to model the latest fashions in clergy robes.

The modelling ministers are showing off the latest designs at an annual Christian event nicknamed The Ideal Church Show this week.
But some of the outfits, from an electric blue dress for female clergy to a full Easter tableau on the front of a flowing white smock, may shock traditionalists used to a simple dog collar.
[NB:] Senior Anglican figures are hoping to show that the church is modernising and can attract younger audiences to it.
Seven clergy from churches in the North West will be taking to the ‘righteous runway’ to exhibit the designs at the Christian Resources Exhibition in Manchester this week.

Called Clergy on the Catwalk it features designers Juliet Hemingray, Hayes and Finch, Cross Designs and J&M Sewing.
The Bishop of Middleton, Rt Rev Mark Davies, said: “It will be interesting to see the variety of clergy robes produced by contemporary designers.
“The church has modernised so much in the past 20 years and what clergy wear reflects that change.
“Gone are the 50 shades of grey [Whoa!  Really?] and in has come a spectrum of colour and design which can be seen in everything from a Church of England royal wedding to the humblest Christening in one of our smaller churches.”
Among those taking part are five male and two female vicars.
One, Rev Taffy Davies of Macclesfield, said: “I have always longed to be a model cleric but I guess I’ll just have to settle for being a clerical model.”
The CRE event is dubbed ‘The Ideal Church Show’ because it features ecclesiastical suppliers who provide everything from church lighting to parish computer systems and even coffins.
The two day show is expected to attract around 3,000 visitors.

Yep… that’ll do it, alright.

Some years back the late Fr. Neuhaus quipped that the Anglican Church made irony redundant.

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged , , ,
70 Comments