A little Sunday Schadenfreude

Posted on 11 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!
HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

You would think that this was from the in the Vatican’s underground newspaper, La Cipolla.

Instead it is from thejournal.ie (.ie… Irish, of course):

Website that helps people leave the Catholic Church to cease operations

ONE OF THE founders of a website that provided information and assistance to people who wished to officially [split an infinitive] leave the Catholic Church has said that the site will close, because formal rules for leaving the church are so hard to navigate.
Countmeout.ie was established in 2009, offering visitors a Declaration of Defection form that could be mailed to a local parish priest. An annotation would then be added to a person’s baptismal certificate, thereby formally severing a persons ties with Catholicism. [Maybe it would and maybe it wouldn’t.]
Over 12,000 of the forms were downloaded from the site, but an official [official again!] change to canon law in 2009 has made it impossible to formally [split an infinitive] defect from the church. The Archdiocese of Dublin said that it will maintain a register of those who have expressed an interest in defecting.
However, without the baptismal certificate [register] annotation, the group says that the register is irrelevant.
Paul Dunbar, one of three people who had founded the CountMeOut website, said that trying to find ways around the 2009 decision by Pope Benedict XVI to abolish formal defection was like “repeatedly hitting our head against a brick wall”. [HA! HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!]
“We can’t get a meaningful answer from anyone in the Catholic Church, so we’ve decided to cease operations.”  [They aren’t alone.]
Dunbar says that even since defection was abolished, many people have visited the website, mailed the owners and “reflected on their own relationship with the Catholic Church.”
“The campaign proved very successful [Oooo… not just successful but very successful.] in the early stages and generated a lot of debate.
As a group, we felt it was important for people to reflect on their relationship with the church and decide whether they could remain as a member.
“The website will remain live for a number of months as we feel the information available on the site may prove useful to some.”

Fine.  Maybe one of the necessary parts of renewal of the Church is the clearing out of this flotsam.

In the meantime, this is amusing.

Posted in Lighter fare, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, The future and our choices | Tagged , , ,
27 Comments

QUAERITUR: How to pray a loved one into Heaven.

Posted on 11 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader:

In your opinion, what is the most efficacious means of praying a loved one into Heaven?  The person is yet living, but not a family member, and a non-practicing Catholic.

First, it shouldn’t have to be said, but I’ll repeat it here: prayer for the dead is efficacious.  God hears our prayers and our prayers are never in vain.  We don’t know for sure the eternal destiny of many who die.  Nevertheless, our prayers and good works for our deceased loved one – and enemies – are in some way helpful for someone.

Second, it shouldn’t have to be said, but why wait to pray for people until after they die?

Thirdly, we have to make a distinction and also “pray into heaven” those who have indeed died, but are in the purifying state of Purgatory.

The very best means?  Have Masses said.   Masses can be offered for both the living and the dead.

Some years ago a friend of mine gave me quite a few Mass stipends for Masses for his mother who, though elderly, was still in pretty good health.  I said a lot of Masses for her while still living.  Happily, she made a good death.  He has Masses said for her now as well, good son that he is.

Masses can be said for the intention of both the living and the dead, even for non-Catholics.  Some people don’t like the idea of having Masses said for non-Catholics.  I respond saying that that just makes us small and stingy.  When the Church says to pray for the dead, she doesn’t add, “only if they are enough like us”.  So, have Masses said for the living and for the dead.

Not everyone can find a priest who can take Mass stipends and intentions.  That is a real problem today.  Pray for vocations.  More priests, more daily Masses, more intentions, win win win.  And, might I add, Save The Liturgy, Save The World.  But I digress.

In addition, Holy Church has the authority to grant from the great spiritual treasury of the merits of Our Lord’s Sacrifice and of the lives (and deaths) of the saints, indulgences for the remission of the temporal punishment due to sin.  Those who die in God’s friendship, but who have not adequately done penance for the sins they committed and which were forgiven before death, have a period of purification of the last vestiges of attachment to sin and to make up for in a penitential way the injustices they perpetrated to God and neighbor.  Only the pure come into God’s presence in heaven, and so, in His love, we have that intermediate state.  Through indulgences, we can help the souls in purgatory by taking something of their penance on us through some prayers and works and proper disposition of soul.  So, keep track of when the Church grants indulgences.  There are usually special opportunities for certain locales as well.  Get informed.  Also note that, according to the Church’s mind now, we gain indulgences for the dead (which God works out) and for ourselves (in a full or partial way).  But to the point of your question and to be clear: indulgences can only be applied to oneself or to a soul in Purgatory, not to another living person.  So, pray yourself into heaven and the poor souls into heaven.

Finally, in your own devotions pray for people.  You can offer any number of small penances/mortifications and prayers, asking the saints to intercede for anyone.  God knows what graces they need.  Ask the saints and the Holy Angels to help them.  You could add your prayers to what the priest pours into the chalice to be transformed at the consecration. You can add your petitions during your prayers of thanksgiving after a good Holy Communion.  Say the Most Holy Rosary, which puts demons to flight in terror and which gives solace to the Poor Souls and garners help for the living.

Any of these sorts of things you can do for yourself, for other living people and for the poor souls.

And keep your own nose clean.  Your good example in words and actions might be another way of helping them to heaven.

And go to confession.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Four Last Things, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , , , , ,
21 Comments

Old Mass Lovin’ Franciscans Friars of the Immaculate

Posted on 11 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

If Pope Francis likes religious with old, simple cars, he ought to love these guys.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgho09AtCxA&feature=player_embedded

 

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged , ,
12 Comments

Catch-22 for Catholic Hospitals under Obamacare

Posted on 10 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

You are a homeless person.  You are sick and you know it is bad.  You stagger into the ER of St. Ipsidipsy Catholic Hospital in Tall Tree Circle.  You have no insurance, health coverage, or money.  You are seen by a doctor and treated.

The Obama Administration then punishes the hospital for treating you, a person without government-approved obligatory Obamacare.

From the Daily Caller:

Obamacare installs new scrutiny, fines for charitable hospitals that treat uninsured people

Charitable hospitals that treat uninsured Americans will be subjected to new levels of scrutiny of their nonprofit status and could face sizable new fines under Obamacare.

A new provision in Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code, which takes effect under Obamacare, sets new standards of review and installs new financial penalties for tax-exempt charitable hospitals, which devote a minimum amount of their expenses to treat uninsured poor people. Approximately 60 percent of American hospitals are currently nonprofit.

Charity for the uninsured is one of the factors that could discourage enrollment in Obamacare, which requires all Americans to purchase health insurance or else face new taxes themselves from the IRS. [You all get that, right?]

“It requires tax-exempt hospitals to do a community needs survey and file additional paperwork with the IRS every three years. This is to prove that the charitable hospital is still needed in their geographical area — ‘needed’ as defined by Obamacare and overseen by IRS bureaucrats,” said John Kartch, spokesman for Americans for Tax Reform.

“Failure to comply, or to prove this continuing need, could result in the loss of the hospital’s tax-exempt status. The hospital would then become a for-profit venture, paying income tax — hence the positive revenue score” for the federal government, Kartch said. “Obamacare advocates turned over every rock to find as much tax money as possible.” [Sly, no?]

Additionally, the rise in the number of insured Americans under Obamacare will make it more difficult for tax-exempt hospitals to continue meeting required thresholds for treating the uninsured, driving more hospitals into the for-profit category and yielding more taxable money for the federal government.

“The requirements generally apply to any section 501(c)(3) organization that operates at least one hospital facility,” according to a “Technical Explanation” report of new Obamacare provisions prepared by the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) on March 21, 2010, the day Obamacare passed.

Obamacare’s new requirements could slam hospitals with massive $50,000 fines if they fail to meet bureaucrats’ standards.

[…]

Read the rest there.

So, the Obama Administration forces everyone to get health coverage, but for a non-profit hospital to maintain its non-profit status, it has to treat a minimum number of those without coverage.  But that pool of people will shrink dramatically, thus driving hospitals into the taxable category.

Good grief.

“Good morning, ma’am!  We’re from the government and we’re here to help!”

 

 

Posted in Religious Liberty, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , , , ,
30 Comments

Wherein Fr. Z tracks back to Pope Francis and priests’ cars: A Response to William Doino, Jr.

Posted on 10 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

A few days ago at First Things William Doino, Jr. posted a well-written, thoughtful piece entitled: “Should Priests Drive Fancy Cars?”

Doino, channeling Francis, advocates the biblical text Matthew 6:19-21:

Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moths and vermin destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in Heaven, where moths and vermin do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there will your heart will be also.

Very good.  Yet, I respond with 1 Timothy 5:18:

Dignus est operarius mercede sua.

This, of course, is rendered as “A worker is worthy of his Mercedes.”

“Mercedes” here needs additional study.  Are priests to be limited to the Mercedes-Benz? Certainly not. Audi, BMW, Porsche and Volkswagen are acceptable by analogy.  Moreover, with a deeper, anagogical hermeneutic, non German-made vehicles are to be tolerated.

Look.  When Pope Francis really gets serious about this and decides to get around on the cheap, he could adopt what is also the greenest shuttle solution of them all!

This is a winner.

Think it through.  He would be close to and even more visible to El Pueblo, the vehicle would be even greener than an electric car, and – for cheap? – men would line up simply for the honor of carrying him around gratis.  What’s wrong with that?

Furthermore, he already has more than one!

If those older chairs are too spiffy, I’ll bet you all the money in my pocket right now that Mercedes-Benz could make a new sedia gestatoria for the Holy Father for a less than the €500k that the popemobile costs.

Or he could choose a local option and get his ride from FIAT!

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged , , ,
25 Comments

Card. Pell about liberal media on Pope Francis and use of media in the future

Posted on 10 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I have been saying from Day 2 of Pope Francis’ pontificate that, eventually, the liberal MSM (and ‘c’atholic media as well) would turn on Francis once they figured out he isn’t on their side of their pet issues.

I read now on the site of the UK’s best Catholic weekly, The Catholic Herald, that His Eminence George Card. Pell thinks along the same line.

Cardinal Pell: Pope Francis’s good press won’t last forever

Cardinal George Pell of Sydney has said that Pope Francis’s popularity with the media is “too good to last”.

The cardinal, a member of the powerful Group of Eight cardinals appointed to advise Francis, made the remark in a reflection on World Youth Day in Rio. His comment followed the Pope being called “awesome” by the men’s magazine Esquire and his face appearing on the cover of Vanity Fair and Time magazine.

Considering the success of World Youth Day, Cardinal Pell said: “Pope Francis’s reception in the secular press is too good to last, but he has cemented his place in the hearts of young Catholics.”

The cardinal also wondered about the presence of surfers at the Pope’s final Mass in Rio.

He said: “The final Mass was a triumph of prayer and worship. Perhaps 50 or 100 continued their surfing, but I am not sure whether this was a small protest or evidence of religious indifference. Pope Francis made his usual three points in the sermon. [He’s a Jesuit, after all.] The young were urged not to spend their lives as spectators on the balcony as the struggle between good and evil, faith and fear, passes below.”

In an interview with The Catholic Herald in May the cardinal said he would be recommending to Pope Francis an overhaul of Vatican communications. “The Vatican has made giant strides in communications,” he said. “I would like to see that continue and develop.”  [DO I HEAR AN “AMEN!”?  And “communications” here has to include more than technology.  It has to do with “message”.  They need to rethink the Press Office, for one.  May they consult Greg Burke more often!]

He added: “The whole gamut, Vatican Radio, the internet, the Osservatore – every instrument that is used to communicate the Church which is based in the Vatican should be developed further.” [And we need to hone the “message”.]

He also said he was not sure Vatican Radio “needs to be quite so expensive”. [There is that.]

Your Eminence, I would also advocate a deepening of a “theology of communication”.   Some baby steps have been taken in this regard in certain documents of the Holy See, but a great deal more needs to be done with it.  May I advocate as a starting point: Christ the Perfect Communicator (Communio et progressio 11).

 

Posted in Francis, Liberals, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , , ,
13 Comments

Summorum Pontificum FINALLY in modern languages on Vatican website. (It only took 6 years.)

Posted on 10 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Some people have of late been concerned that Pope Francis and his minions were on the verge of overturning Pope Benedict’s provisions in Summorum Pontificum (aka The Emancipation Proclamation).  Summorum Pontificum is arguably one of the most important, long-reaching acts of Benedict XVI’s pontificate.

For years we have in wonder, and not a little scorn, seen that on the Vatican website Summorum Pontificum was provided only in Latin and in Hungarian translation.   This is what it looked like:

How’s your Hungarian?

Now, however, we see that – 6 year later – the other languages have been added.

“But Father! But Father!”, some of you are saying, even as you slap the desk with your sweaty palms, “What does this mean? Does this mean that everyone can relax now? That Summorum Pontificum is safe?”

May I point out to everyone that this happened under POPE FRANCIS?

I don’t know what it means beyond the fact that more translations are now on the Vatican website… after 6 years.

It might mean that with the appointment of Archbp. Pozzo back to the PCED the Lidless Eye of the Secretariat of State has turned its gaze to the Commission, blown the dust of the file, and finally updated the site.

Could it mean more?

We need carefully to double-check the translations.  Let’s make sure they conform to the Latin and that there are no time bombs.   Not that I’m suspicious or anything.

Hey! Trust but verify!

In case it slipped your mind: Benedict XVI is the Pope of Christian Unity.

Posted in Benedict XVI, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, Pope of Christian Unity, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM | Tagged , ,
17 Comments

RI: Priest tells pols that he will inform parishioners about their immoral votes on legislation

Posted on 9 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The culture wars are getting hotter.  “Social issues” will remain key issues in the next couple election cycles in these USA, which will probably cause a couple train-wrecks for Catholics and for libertarians… and even for Catholic Tea Party members.  On that point, the great Samuel Gregg has a new book coming out (pre-order HERE) which I am reading in an advance copy.

So… we track back to priest and bishops being involved in politics.  Whenever a priest or a bishop enunciates clearly and accurately a teaching of the Church which would bring any sound Catholic to shun certain candidates, those priests and bishops are accused of being political, of “imposing their views”, or of “interfering”.

It was with great interest that I read about a priest in Rhode Island, Fr. Brian Sistare.

At RI Future I read this (my emphases and comments):

Priest to legislators: I will campaign against you from church [Let’s see if that is actually what the priest did.]
By Bob Plain

A Catholic priest is said to have sent an email to legislators who voted for same sex marriage threatening to use his bully pulpit as a church leader to get them unelected. [Note reporter’s choice of vocabulary.]

“I’m praying for each of you, that you turn back to God,” said an email purportedly from Father Brian Sistare, who is now the priest at Sacred Heart in Woonsocket. “I’m also going to let my Parish know exactly how you voted, so come re-election time, you will not be re-elected.”

As non-profit entities, churches are legally forbidden from engaging in political campaign activity.  [Is what Father did “political activity”?]

The email was sent to the 26 state senators who voted for marriage equality and was signed and seemingly [Is the reporter purposely “hedging”?  Of is this a way of associating what the priest did?  Think about how newsies, for legal reasons, will say “alleged murderer”, for legal reasons.  But that commonplace reference now might have a broader rhetorical use.  Just sayin’…] sent by Sistare. Sistare, who was a priest at St. Rocco Church in Johnston at the time, did not return a call for comment earlier this week to RI Future and has since declined to comment to other media outlets as well.

Sistare is said to have told married gay parishoners that he would not serve them communion [The writer is ignorant of how Catholics phrase things.  Shouldn’t they do at least a little homework?] unless they ended their marriages. Divorce is considered a sin to devout Catholics but the church does have an annulment process. [How many things are wrong in this paragraph?  First, there is no distinction about “marriage”.  The writer simply asserts that the “gay” parishoners are “married”, and that they should end their “marriages”.  I guess we are talking about civil “marriages”, for if it were even possible that there could be such a thing as a “gay marriage” in the Church, then how could there be “gay marriage divorce”?  This is getting surreal, real fast.]

Here’s the full email sent to state senators:

Dear RI Senators who voted for “marriage” between members of the same sex,

Yesterday was a very sad day for our little state of Rhode Island. I’m still shocked that each of you took it upon yourself to take the place of God and redefine what He has established. Marriage has always been understood as the union between one man and one woman. This is a 5,000 year old fact! I’m wondering what you will do when a mother comes to you and asks to be married to her son, or a cousin wants to marry her first cousin, or when a man wants to marry 2 or 3 women, or a human being wants to marry his animal? [Or several animals… or several underage animals?] What will you do, now that you have decided that Marriage is no longer a sacred union between one man and one woman?
For those of you Senators who are baptized Catholics, I invite you to go to the Sacrament of Confession to receive God’s Mercy and Forgiveness for your grave sin of voting against God yesterday, so you’ll be able to receive Holy Communion again in the Catholic Church. [“Invite”… not so threatening.]
For those of you who claim to be a disciple of Jesus Christ, I also invite you to repentance in your own faith tradition; and to those who claim no religious affiliation, I pray that you also see the error of your ways.
Your decision yesterday will have a lot of consequences on those of us who hold God’s definition of Marriage between one man and one woman. Already my Pastor from my hometown of Westerly is being accused by a confirmed lesbian [I think “confirmed” here means something like “self-avowed”.], of violating the tax exempt status of the Catholic Church for telling his parishioners to contact Senator Algiere about his upcoming vote [There is nothing wrong, in itself, with telling people to be politically involved.] – unfortunately, Senator Algiere, you betrayed your own Catholic Faith and your constituents in voting for sodomy yesterday. Also, my little niece Giana was coming out of school the other day when her fellow 4 year old classmate remarked to her that 2 women could marry. Thankfully, my niece told the little boy the TRUTH that this isn’t the case, that Marriage is only between one man and one woman.
I’m praying for each of you, that you turn back to God. I’m also going to let my Parish know exactly how you voted, so come re-election time, you will not be re-elected.  [He doesn’t say that he will tell them not to vote for X.  He says that he will tell them how X voted.  As a consequence, well-formed Catholics would on their own choose not to vote for that candidate without being told how to vote.  Right?]
Fr. Sistare
St. Rocco Church
Johnston, RI

Fr. Sistare isn’t afraid to speak up.

At the top of the news piece, the claim was made in the headline: “Priest to legislators: I will campaign against you from church”

Is that what Fr. Sistare did?

Posted in Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liberals, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Pò sì jiù, Religious Liberty, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , ,
45 Comments

What is right and what is wrong with the phrase “What Would Jesus Do?”

Posted on 9 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

In another post today I asked a question about a blasphemous car sticker involving a variation of the abbreviation WWJD, which we all know is supposed to mean “What Would Jesus Do?”

In my experience, WWJD is tossed about by low-information Christians when they want you to conform to a vague moralism they have just advanced (usually involving higher taxes and bigger government or else ignoring objectively grave sins).

The phrase is mostly misused.  It can probably be used well.

What is right and what is wrong with the phrase “What Would Jesus Do?”

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill, What are they REALLY saying? | Tagged ,
58 Comments

UK Vicarette with obscene car sticker involving the Lord’s Name

Posted on 9 August 2013 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Can I get your take on this one?

I am not going to include images.  They would just invite comments all by themselves.

Keep in mind that the “blech factor” is going to be pretty high in this article.

From the Daily Mail:

‘What The F*** Would Jesus Do?’: Female VICAR causes stir with obscene car sticker
Reverend Alice Goodman put the sticker on her red Subaru Legacy
Some members of her parish in Cambridgeshire were offended by the motto
Dr Goodman claims it is harmless and says ‘F***’ is ‘an Old English word’

When the Rev Alice Goodman bought a bumper sticker for her car, she wanted something that would catch people’s attention.
But perhaps she did not envisage the unholy row that her choice would one day provoke.
For seven years the noted opera librettist and wife of a distinguished poet drove around happily with the sticker bearing the letters WTFWJD? on the back of her red Subaru Legacy.
Now, however, someone in her rural parish has complained after realising that the letters stand for What The F*** Would Jesus Do?
The offended parishioner took a photograph of the 54-year-old American-born vicar driving in her car and sent it to the local newspaper along with an anonymous letter quoting the Bible’s prohibition of swearing.
Yesterday, Miss Goodman, rector in the Fulbourn and the Wilbrahams parish in Cambridgeshire, was unrepentant about the sticker and said her detractors should ‘get a life’.
‘F*** is not a blasphemy, it’s a vulgarity, an Old English word,’ said Miss Goodman, who is married to Sir Geoffrey Hill, professor of poetry at the University of Oxford.
‘My bishop knows I have the sticker on my car, and has no difficulty with it, and I’ve had the former Archbishop of Canterbury in my car, Rowan Williams, and he didn’t raise an eyebrow.’ [Which, in his case, is not a small matter!]
The parishioner, quoting from James 5:12, had written to the newspaper:
‘The Bible says: “But above all do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your yes be yes and your no be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation”.’
Miss Goodman said she has no intention of using the F-word in the pulpit. ‘The sticker is urging people to just wake up and take notice,’ she said.
‘The Gospel that I’m preparing to teach on this week is the one where Jesus says he comes not to bring peace but the sword. I’ve never had a complaint about it before.
‘I would suggest that anyone who thinks it is inappropriate should get out a little more.
‘The important distinction to be made is with taking the name of the Lord in vain and the common vulgarities.
‘I wouldn’t use language like that in church. But that’s why I have it on the back of my car – it’s a different context.

[…]

Blech!

You can read the rest there.

Thoughts?

I can just imagine the firestorm that would result were I to start of line of car magnets with this … abbreviation.

Posted in The Drill | Tagged , ,
88 Comments