QUAERITUR: During Mass, whole congregation told to raise hands to bless people

From a reader:

At Mass today the congregation was asked to raise their hands in blessing over members that are celebrating an anniversary in Sept. I can’t find anything in the GIRM that addresses raising our hands in blessing at Mass. I am uncomfortable with this gesture. Can you tell me if it is appropriate.

Yes.

No.

Yes, I can tell you. No, it is not appropriate.

After Mass, perhaps. Even then… not so much. At the time of the priest’s blessing at the end of Mass, no. No, again. No.

Anything that might confuse people about the invocative blessings of a priest and some invocation made by laity should be avoided.

I am sure this gave some people a warm fuzzy. It probably gave others a shiver of discomfort at the liturgical abuse.

Still, in the larger sphere of things, this is pretty tame.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , ,
38 Comments

15 Sept – LONDON – Bloggers Guild Meeting – Brompton Oratory – TLM – BLOGNIC/PUB

There is going to be a meeting of The Guild of Blessed Titus Brandsma (a Catholic bloggers guild) at the Brompton Oratory, St Wilfred’s Chapel at 10.30am on 15 September.

God willing, I will be there.

For more on this see the blog Linen By The Hedgerow.

They have a good project going. And I am delighted that they are using the term “blognic”!

Posted in Blognics, Just Too Cool, On the road, Our Catholic Identity, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged , , ,
Comments Off on 15 Sept – LONDON – Bloggers Guild Meeting – Brompton Oratory – TLM – BLOGNIC/PUB

Comments on Fishwrap’s editorial against Bp. Finn and their call for his removal

Today Fishwrap offers up a fantasy editorial railing against Bp. Robert Finn of Kansas City-St. Joseph.  Based on his conviction by a Kansas City court, Fishwrap demands Finn’s resignation or removal from office.

It would take too many words here to pull their editorial apart, so just go read it HERE.

I don’t remember seeing National catholic Reporter‘s editorials demanding the resignation of Archbp. Rembert Weakland or Card. Mahony.  They were into some truly deep problems, but there was no high dudgeon from NCR about them.

Bp. Finn got what we can only describe as a hand-slapping by a court.  He received suspended probation the record of which is then to be expunged from his record.  If what Finn did was truly a massive crime, would the court have done this?

Based on this draconian sentence inflicted by the court, Fishwrap claims that Bp. Finn won’t even be able to blow a pitch pipe in a church because of his record… a record he won’t have.

Just to refresh your memory, from the Kansas City Star:

The verdicts came after a short nonjury trial in Jackson County Circuit Court. Judge John Torrence immediately sentenced Finn to two years’ of probation, then suspended the imposition of the sentence. That means that if Finn finishes the probation without incident and completes nine steps as part of his sentence, the bishop’s criminal record will be expunged.

In the present environment, this outcome for Finn and the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph is the best that could have been hoped for. Even the all charges against the Diocese itself were dropped.

How thin does Fishwrap want the tripwire for bishops to be?

I can see it now.  When bishops are finally elected by the laity, their principal job description will be to report whispered suspicions concerning priests to the police. Perhaps we will even have new statistics for bishops: Earned Reporting Average.  They will have a red phone installed in their offices connecting directly to the DA’s mobile and a black phone hotline near to hand so that they can receive the daily stream of anonymous tips from people who have suspicions.

The NCR piece inflates what happened in Kansas City to the point where it is unrecognizable. The editorial seeks to group Finn together with the likes of Law, Bevilacqua, Mahony.

I didn’t see an editorial from NCR demanding that the LCWR meet with SNAP.  Did you?  Beat bishops and priests to pieces.  Nuns get a pass.

Bottom line, for those who are distracted by other issues:

The editors hate Bp. Finn, bishop of the diocese where their offices are.  They hate him with a personal hatred, unhinged animus.  I think they are actually happy that the diocese had to spend piles of money on this, because, in the end, it hurt Bp. Finn.  They are inflating what the court recognized as something so vaporous as to require that even the record of it be expunged, and they are dancing around it with pikes and torches.

The moderation queue is on, to filter comments that pursue tangents.

UPDATE: 13 Sept 1410 GMT:

I am receiving email from some people who are whining that I am not letting their comments (focused on the need for Bp. Finn to resign) through to public view.

Too bad.

I guess, however, that I have to explain what is going on here.

Bp. Finn’s removal by the Holy Father, or his resignation, or his remaining in place, is grist for some other post, but not this one.   This entry is about the NCR more than it is about Bp. Finn’s future.  NCR hates Bp. Finn and they will do anything to the facts to make him look bad.  They don’t do this because they are interested in the truth.  They do it because of their unhinged animus.

Posted in Biased Media Coverage, Clerical Sexual Abuse, One Man & One Woman, The Drill, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged , , ,
19 Comments

Notice anything missing from the President’s 9-11 Proclamation?

On the site of The White House:

Presidential Proclamation — Patriot Day and National Day of Service and Remembrance, 2012

PATRIOT DAY AND NATIONAL DAY OF SERVICE AND REMEMBRANCE, 2012

– – – – – – –

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

On September 11, 2001, a bright autumn day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history. Thousands of innocent men, women, and children perished when mighty towers collapsed in the heart of New York City and wreckage burned in Pennsylvania and at the Pentagon. They were family and friends, service members and first responders — and the tragedy of their loss left pain that will never fade and scars our country will never forget.

More than a decade later, the world we live in is forever changed. But as we mark the anniversary of September 11, we remember what remains the same: our character as a Nation, our faith in one another, and our legacy as a country strengthened by service and selflessness. In the spirit that moved rescue workers and firefighters to charge into darkness and danger that September morning, we see the same sense of moral responsibility that drove countless Americans to give of themselves in the months that followed. We offered our neighbors a hand and lined up to give blood. Many helped our Nation rebuild and recover long after the dust had settled, donating and volunteering and helping survivors who had borne so much. We were united, and the outpouring of generosity reminded us that, through challenges that have spanned from acts of terrorism to natural disasters, we go forward together as one people.

Today, as we remember the victims, their families, and the heroes who stood up during one of our country’s darkest moments, I invite all Americans to reclaim that abiding spirit of compassion by serving their communities in the days and weeks ahead. From volunteering with a faith-based organization, to collecting food and clothing for those in need, to preparing care packages for our men and women in uniform, there are many ways to bring service into our everyday lives — and each of us can do something. To get involved and find a local service opportunity, visit www.Serve.gov, or www.Servir.gov for Spanish speakers.

Even the simplest act of kindness can be a way to honor those we have lost, and to help build stronger communities and a more resilient Nation. By joining together on this solemn anniversary, let us show that America’s sense of common purpose need not be a fleeting moment, but a lasting virtue — not just on one day, but every day.

By a joint resolution approved December 18, 2001 (Public Law 107-89), the Congress has designated September 11 of each year as “Patriot Day,” and by Public Law 111-13, approved April 21, 2009, the Congress has requested the observance of September 11 as an annually recognized “National Day of Service and Remembrance.”

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, do hereby proclaim September 11, 2012, as Patriot Day and National Day of Service and Remembrance. I call upon all departments, agencies, and instrumentalities of the United States to display the flag of the United States at half-staff on Patriot Day and National Day of Service and Remembrance in honor of the individuals who lost their lives on September 11, 2001. I invite the Governors of the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and interested organizations and individuals to join in this observance. I call upon the people of the United States to participate in community service in honor of those our Nation lost, to observe this day with appropriate ceremonies and activities, including remembrance services, and to observe a moment of silence beginning at 8:46 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time to honor the innocent victims who perished as a result of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this tenth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand twelve, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.

BARACK OBAMA

Other than in the date at the end, there is no mention of God.

Posted in Liberals | Tagged , , ,
26 Comments

Obama’s Justice Dept. suing Gallup Polls after results they didn’t like. Coincidence?

Via DickMorris.com

Obama Thugs Rough Up Gallup For Polls They Don’t Like

The Obama Administration’s Justice Department announced, on August 22nd, that it was joining a lawsuit by a former Gallup employee and whistleblower against the Gallup Corporation for allegedly overcharging the government on polling work. [But look at the sequence of events…]
The announcement comes on the heels of a confrontation between Gallup staffers and Obama strategist David Axelrod in which he accused the company of using out of date sampling methods which, he said, generated polling data negative to the president.  [So, the Obama campaign doesn’t like the results of a Gallup poll.  There is a confrontation. Suddenly Obama’s Justice Dept. joins a lawsuit against Gallup.  But wait!  There’s more…]
The whistleblower’s lawsuit has been kicking around since 2009, [!] but the Justice Department joined the suit only after the run-in between Axelrod and Gallup in April of this year.
In a scene right out of a typical authoritarian regime, Fox News reports that “employees at the venerable Gallup polling firm suggested they felt threatened by Obama campaign adviser David Axelrod [A key component of Obama’s Chicago machine…] when he questioned the methodology of a mid-April poll showing Mitt Romney leading the president – according to internal emails published Thursday.”
That poll that sent Axelrod ballistic showed Romney leading Obama 48-43 percent.
The Daily Caller published e mails that started when Axelrod sent a tweet to Gallup saying the tracking poll was “saddled with some methodological problems” and directing followers to a National Journal story in which a professor suggested outdated sampling.
According to the email chain titled “Axelrod vs. Gallup,” the White House in addition asked that a Gallup staffer “come over and explain our methodology,” which was apparently perceived as a subtle threat.
Fox News reported that “a Gallup official said in an email he thought Axelrod’s pressure ‘sounds a little like a Godfather situation.’” [“Iu sàcciu unni tu stài!”]
Gallup refused to change its methodology to suit the White House.  [And now they are being sued by Obama’s Justice department.]
And the Justice Department intervention in the whistleblower suit came three months later. The whistleblower, Michael Lindley, claims that Gallup violated the False Claims Act by overcharging the federal government for its services to the U.S. Mint, the State Department and other federal agencies. The Justice Department plans to add Gallup’s work with FEMA to the list of alleged overcharges covered in the lawsuit.
Lindley charged that Gallup overestimated the number of hours of field work that the government surveys would require and that it billed the feds based on the inflated estimates.
According to the Washington Times, Lindley worked for the Obama campaign in 2008 as an Iowa field organizer based out of Council Bluffs, Iowa.
As the election progresses, this blatant effort to influence Gallup’s data and its poll numbers is an example of Chicago political thugs at their worst.

 

[wp_youtube]IRoh62wRgkc[/wp_youtube]

Posted in Religious Liberty, Slubberdegullions, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , ,
25 Comments

A noted theologian changes his mind about “pro multis” meaning “for all”

From Sandro Magister’s site Chiesa:

Vatican Diary / The conversion of bishop-theologian Bruno Forte
He was a determined supporter of “for all” in the words of the consecration. But the pope’s letter to the German bishops has changed his mind. Now he too wants “for many” to be said. Behind the scenes of the turnaround

VATICAN CITY, September 10, 2012 – The dispute over the translation of “pro multis” in the formula of Eucharistic consecration has been expanded, in Italy, with an interesting new contribution.

In the Sunday, August 26 edition of the leading Italian newspaper, “Corriere della Sera” a highly prominent figure took the field in this argument, the archbishop of Chieti and Vasto Bruno Forte, a former member of the international theological commission who was consecrated as a bishop by then-cardinal Joseph Ratzinger:

> Quell’Ultima Cena con le sedie vuote

In the article, in the wake of the letter addressed last April 14 by Benedict XVI to the German bishops, Forte took a clear position in favor of the translation “per molti,” to replace the “per tutti” that entered into use after the Council in Italy and in many other countries.

“Theologically,” Forte writes, “the translation ‘per molti’ seems to me more respectful of everyone’s freedom, and in no way excludes the offering of salvation to all made by Jesus on the cross.”  [I like the “freedom” argument.]

“For this reason,” he adds in concluding the article, “I prefer the translation ‘per molti,’ and I maintain that if explained well it can be of help and encouragement to many.”

Forte also criticizes the translation that is found in the French missal, “pour la moltitude,” recently praised by two Italian scholars, Francesco Pieri and Silvio Barbaglia.

Forte dismisses the version that they propose, “per una moltitudine,” as one of those “intermediate solutions” that “while admirable” are “inevitably compromisory.” [It would be good to know his reasons.]

*

Forte’s joining the fray is significant, and in some ways surprising.

It is significant because he is one of the best-known Italian bishops, including at the international level, and enjoys a substantial following among his brother bishops, who in fact appointed him as their representative at the worldwide synod on the new evangelization that will be held in Rome in October. Of the four selections he is the only one without the scarlet, the other three being all cardinals: Angelo Bagnasco, Giuseppe Betori, and Angelo Scola.

It is surprising because Forte has always been considered a theologian of the progressive camp, [Indeed.] the camp that most opposes, and not only in Italy, the passage from “for all” to “for many.”

At the memorable ecclesial conference in Loreto in 1985, which marked the ascent in the leadership of the Italian Church of then-auxiliary bishop of Reggio Emilia Camillo Ruini, Forte was fighting for the other and the winning side, together with the president of the episcopal conference at the time, Anastasio Ballestrero, and Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini. And it was he who gave the introductory theological presentation.

This is why he has not rarely ended up in the crosshairs of his more conservative theologian colleagues.

For example, in a 2004 article Fr. Nicola Bux, [HURRAY!] an adviser – both then and now – to the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, singled out Forte as one of the “promulgators” of a “weak and derivative theology” concerning the resurrection of Jesus, reduced “to an ‘etiological legend,’ or an artifice in support of the worship that the Judeo-Christians were conducting on the site of Jesus’ burial.”

But Forte’s taking the field is even more surprising because it marks in him a change of judgment with respect to the past.

During the general assembly of the CEI in November of 2010, when the Italian bishops reiterated with a landslide vote their support of the preservation of the version “per tutti,” Forte was among the few who took part in the discussion on the topic in the assembly. And he spoke out in support of the majority.

On that occasion, the Neapolitan theologian – an uncle of the prosecutor John Henry Woodcock, very well known for his judicial investigations with a significant media component, the latest of them against former IOR president Ettore Gotti Tedeschi – indeed affirmed that “the alternative ‘per molti/per tutti’ contains a theologically founded nuance,” but – he added – this is a nuance “too subtle to be explained to the people,” and so expressed the opinion of “maintaining the translation currently in use.”  [Sound familiar?  “It’s tooo haaard!”]

In that assembly, the bishops voted overwhelmingly in favor of of the maintenance of “per tutti” with 171 votes out of 187 voters (apart from one blank ballot, only 11 expressed themselves in favor of “per molti,” and 4 for the version “per le moltitudini”). And this in spite of the circular letter with which in October of 2006 the Vatican congregation for divine worship had given the worldwide episcopates the authoritative indication, at the mandate of the newly elected Benedict XVI, of translating with “for many” the “pro multis” of the Latin “editio typica” of the Roman missal.

*

Currently, the text of the new translation of the Italian missal is under inspection by the congregation for divine worship, which must give the necessary “recognitio.” And in the light of the pope’s letter to the German bishops of last April, it is easy to predict that the dicastery will not compromise over the change from “per tutti” to “per molti.” [Good.]

The match could still remain open as far as other sensitive points of translation are concerned. Like the changes proposed by the bishops, with overwhelming votes in support of departing from the original Latin for the “pax hominibus bonae voluntatis” of the Gloria or for the “ne nos inducas in temptationem” of the Our Father, or, with a contrary criterion, the request not to touch the current Italian version of the “Domine non sum dignus,” conspicuously – and arbitrarily – different from the original Latin (“Signore, io non sono degno di partecipare alla tua mensa” instead of “Signore, io non sono degno che tu entri sotto il mio tetto” of the Latin missal, taken word for word from Matthew 8:7).

In this context is situated Forte’s turnaround in favor of “per molti.” A turnaround that the more malicious interpret as his hopping onto the bandwagon of the victor, in a battle that for him is already lost, in view of possible future promotions.

Forte was considered to be in the running for the patriarchate of Venice, and for that position had a public “endorsement” from the former center-left mayor of the city, the philosopher Massimo Cacciari.

Now the grand maneuvers have already begun for two Italian sees of cardinalate tradition – Bologna and Palermo – the pastors of which, Carlo Caffarra and Paolo Romeo respectively, will turn 75 in 2013. But this is another story.

Posted in Fr. Z KUDOS, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged , ,
16 Comments

Archbp. of Kirkuk, Iraq: Let’s Talk to Benedict XVI Frankly, Openly

From ZENIT:

Iraq Prelate: Let’s Talk to Benedict XVI Frankly, Openly

Kirkuk Archbishop Hoping Church Leaders Will Tell Pope in Lebanon of Grave Situation for Christians

ROME, SEPT. 7, 2012 (Zenit.org).- The archbishop of Kirkuk, Iraq, is hoping Benedict XVI’s trip to Lebanon next week will motivate bishops of the Middle East to speak openly with the Pontiff about the danger of Christianity fading away from the region. Archbishop Louis Sako told the charity Aid to the Church in Need Christian leaders should “go beyond the formalities” to spell out their concerns for the survival of the faith when they see the Pope during his Sept. 14-16 trip.

Archbishop Sako underlined the extent of the Christian exodus from the Middle East, saying that it showed no sign of stopping and indeed had spread from Iraq to other countries, notably Syria.He also said that, despite considerable political discussion, extremism and sectarianism are growing and that in response Christians are leaving the region that had been home to their families for thousands of years.

The rise of political Islam is a matter of worry,” the archbishop said. “We Christians are a minority and there is no prospect of us gaining equal citizenship in the concrete reality of day-to-day life and there is no vision of a better future.

“Everyone is speaking of democracy and freedom but the reality on the ground is different.”The sectarianism is gaining ground and the majority are not taking care of minority groups. I think there are real fears of more Christians leaving.”He described the difficulty of encouraging faithful in his Diocese of Kirkuk to stay, saying many if not most have left.”From my diocese there are few families left. I cannot stop them [leaving] and speaking truthfully I have no magic solutions.

I am doing my best to keep them, defend them and encourage them. That has limited the problem but it is sad to see them leaving for good. As a pastor, I feel bad.”Archbishop Sako reiterated that Christians feel like second-class citizens in a state based on Islam. He also acknowledged that some Christians get discouraged by a lack of strong Church leadership.

“Our hierarchy has become tired and it is sad to say we are sometimes divided,” he admitted.”It is necessary today to develop a Christian Arab theology able to announce the word of God to Arab Christians – and those who are not Christians – and help them to discover God’s love and paternal presence, enhancing dialogue and strengthening co-existence,” he reflected. “This theology does not mean isolation from the theology of the Universal Church but rather one which interacts with events and hence assists the Eastern Church with its mission.”

 

Posted in New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , , ,
35 Comments

A Prayer For Vocations

Please use the sharing buttons!  Thanks!

Here is a prayer that perhaps parish priests will pick up and use at all Sunday and Holy Day Masses, perhaps immediately after the Gospel:

LEADER: Please kneel for our prayer for vocations.

ALL: O God, we earnestly beseech Thee to bless this (arch)diocese with many priests, brothers and sisters, who will gladly spend their entire lives to serve Thy Church and to make Thee known and loved.

LEADER: Bless our families. Bless our children.

ALL: Choose from our homes those who are needed for Thy work.
Amen.

LEADER: Mary, Queen of the Clergy.

ALL: Pray for us. Pray for our priests and religious. Obtain for us many more.

This prayer – which if memory serves was penned by the late Archbishop Brady of St. Paul and Minneapolis – was said by the congregation at my home parish, St. Agnes in St. Paul, for decades at every Sunday Mass. Hearing and saying the prayer every Sunday played a role in my own vocation. During the time of the late pastor Msgr. Schuler, a First Mass was celebrated at that parish every year for over 30 years.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, The future and our choices, Year of Faith | Tagged , , , , ,
5 Comments

“From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge—a Church that has lost much.”

Joseph Card. Ratzinger wrote this many years ago:

From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge—a Church that has lost much. It will become small and will have to start afresh more or less from the beginning. It will no longer be able to inhabit many of the edifices it built in its palmy days. As the number of its adherents diminishes, so will it lose many of its social privileges. In contrast to an earlier age, it will be seen much more as a voluntary society, entered only by free decision. As a small society it will make much bigger demands on the initiative of its individual members. Undoubtedly it will discover new forms of ministry, and will ordain to the priesthood approved Christians who pursue some profession. In many smaller congregations or in self-contained social groups, pastoral care will normally be provided in this fashion. Alongside this, the full-time ministry of the priesthood will be indispensable as formerly.

The Church will be a more spiritualized Church, not presuming upon a political mantle, flirting as little with the Left as with the Right. It will be hard going for the Church, for the process of crystallization and clarification will cost it much valuable energy. It will make it poor and cause it to become the Church of the meek. The process will be all the more arduous, for sectarian narrow-mindedness as well as pompous self-will will have to be shed. (…). But when the trial of this sifting is past, a great power will flow from a more spiritualized and simplified Church. (…) It may well no longer be the dominant social power to the extent that it was until recently; but it will enjoy a fresh blossoming, and be seen as humanity’s home where they will find life and hope beyond death.

From Glaube un Zukunft (1970) Faith and the Future (1971/2006)

We need a Marshall Plan for the Church.

Biretta tip to a reader who posted the excerpt in a comment.

Posted in Benedict XVI, Brick by Brick, Linking Back, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, The future and our choices | Tagged
14 Comments

National catholic Reporter’s misleading piece about Bp. Morlino, Rep. Ryan.

Are we surprised when the National catholic Reporter (aka Fishwrap) posts a a misleading, prejudicial report about a sound and strong Catholic bishop?

Here is Fishwrap’s piece:

Bishop Robert Morlino of Madison, Wis., (Rep. Paul Ryan’s home diocese) gives some political science lessons in the local newspaper:

“If people begin to look to government for everything, that’s how we get toward a state-imposed socialism, which is never acceptable from a Catholic point of view because it’s contrary to reason, which says that human labor should yield its fruits, and that those who labor own the fruits,” Morlino said.

Those with an abundance are obligated to share with those who lack basics, Morlino said, but the best way to do that is at the level closest to the people in need, a Catholic principle called subsidiarity.

“It’s just common sense,” Morlino said. “In other words, if I can help you directly, why should we bring it to the mayor or the government or the president of the United States, if I can just help you?”

Earlier, writing in his diocesan newspaper, Morlino called socialism “intrinsically evil.”

Does the Fishwrap’s piece sound to you like a defense of socialism?

Fishwrap’s piece is misleading.  Fishwrap, in their summary of Bp. Morlino’s remarks in the Madison newspaper, left out this key statement,

“Charitable giving respects individual freedoms and reduces bureaucratic costs, Morlino said. However, charity can’t do it all, and government has a responsibility to those who are poor, especially in times of profound need, such as a natural disaster, he said.”

Fishwrap would have you think that Bp. Morlino is against any role for government in helping the poor.

I think Fishwrap was irritated by Bp. Morlino’s statement, again in the Madison paper, about an ever-expanding government:

“If people begin to look to government for everything, that’s how we get toward a state-imposed socialism, which is never acceptable from a Catholic point of view because it’s contrary to reason, which says that human labor should yield its fruits, and that those who labor own the fruits,” Morlino said.

And…

But in general, governments “should not be in the business of distribution of wealth,” Morlino said.

I think Fishwrap‘s problem with Morlino, today anyway, is that Morlino isn’t a socialist.

Irritate the Fishwrapers …

Posted in Biased Media Coverage, Liberals, Magisterium of Nuns, The Drill, The future and our choices, Throwing a Nutty, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | Tagged , , , , , , , ,
15 Comments