The stupidest thing I have read in a long time

On a site called – ironically – The Moderate Voice I saw one of the stupidest things I have ever read.  As a matter of fact, this is the sort of entry that brings well-deserved scorn down on many slapdash internet sites and gives blogs and so forth a bad image.

I will not reproduce the whole thing here, because it is so riddled with errors of thought and of history that it would take too much time to untangle them.

I think what is at the heart of this idiotic piece is both baggage about the Church and a desire to destroy traditional marriage in favor of homosexual unions.

Here are a couple samples.  Set your coffee down.

Raise your hand if you knew that the linkage of “marriage” and religious norms is an artifact of the Catholic Church’s fight for its life in the 16th century?

I’m guessing that many Americans would shudder if they realized that their current religious beliefs were so wedded to the Church’s fight with Protestants. The supremacy of The Church in all things marriage was formalized with The Council of Trent (1545 – 1563), which was organized in response to the “heresies” of the Protestants, led by Martin Luther.  From Wikipedia (emphasis added):

The writer then quotes some things about the reaction of the Church at the Council of Trent in the face of Protestant attacks on marriage as a sacrament (Protestants don’t believe marriage is a sacrament).

The writer thinks that because the Church reacted to Protestant errors, and established a theology of marriage and canons about belief in marriage as a sacrament and its celebration then… wait for that… that is what the Church – I am not making this up – invented marriage.

Yes, friends, the Church invented marriage in the 16th century.  It seems that during the first 15 centuries of her mission the Church didn’t bother much with marriage.

So why would this person write something which is so obviously absurd?  Keep in mind that the writer doesn’t have clue about any dimension of her subject.

The rhetoric surrounding California’s Prop 8 has its roots in the evolution of marriage from a means of male lineage preservation (Jews and the God of Israel and the Old Testament) to a convenience of economics (where women were chattel) to a ceremony of religious sanctity. It is time for America to truly throw off the shackles of the Church and embrace marriage as “an expression of the right to happiness,” a journey with a major milepost during my lifetime — Loving v Virginia. We need a clean break between state and church, marriage that is a private contract between two consenting adults. Period.

Get the picture?

The next step in this program will allow you to marry your dog.

Posted in One Man & One Woman, The Drill, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged , , , ,
32 Comments

QUAERITUR: a blessed object as a raffle prize

From a reader:

We recently had a bingo at our parish and the main prize for a raffle was a beautiful portrait of Our Lady of Guadalupe. Prior to the bingo, the portrait was blessed by a priest. I know sacramentals can’t be sold (that’s why they are blessed after the item is sold), would the same rationale apply for a raffled item? Thanks.

 

I suspect that there was no intention on the part of the priest to cause confusion.  The fact that he wanted people to know that the image was blessed is a clue that he has a good understanding that blessings are important.

I cannot tell the difference between a direct sale of a blessed image, and, on the other hand, an auction or a raffle.

We may not sell objects which are in themselves holy things (the Blessed Sacrament, relics) or things which have been consecrated or blessed (sacramentals, etc.).   The sale of things which are in themselves holy is the sin of sacrilege.  In the case of the sale of the Blessed Sacrament there is an automatic excommunication and the sin falls in the category of graviora delicta, more serious crimes, which have been in the spotlight recently.  The sale of blessed objects causes them to lose their blessing and gives the impression that holy objects are for those who can afford them, or that holy things can be the objects of commerce.

I recommend that the person who obtained the painting take it to be blessed again.   Also, in the future, should there be such a raffle, the priest should bless the objects after people have taken possession of them.

Posted in ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged , ,
4 Comments

QUAERITUR: Priest in confession doesn’t ask for Act of Contrition

From a reader:

My parish pastor forgets to ask me to say the Act of Contrition after I’ve finished my Confession.  (I should note that he is from Cuba and that he does not speak English well at all, although he does read the Absolution in English and I can understand it.) 

Should I add it in somewhere – at the beginning or at the end – or just say it to myself before I go into the Confessional?  Has my Confession been valid if I haven’t said the Act of Contrition? 

(I am a convert, and didn’t have any instruction on how to make a good Confession.  I’m just trying to educate myself so I can receive all of God’s graces, since I really need them.)

Thank you for being so interested in receiving absolution properly and receiving the graces from the sacrament.  Would that all priests were so diligent.
 
The main point of the Act of Contrition (which everyone should know – and I think the traditional version is best) is to give the priest confessor the assurance that you are sufficiently sorry for your sins and purpose of amendment so that he can give you absolution.  If a priest is not sufficiently assured that the "penitent" is really penitent, he cannot absolve.  So, the Act of Contrition expresses both a less perfect sorrow for sin (dread of the loss of heaven and the pains of hell) and a more perfect sorrow (because God is worthy of love) and also a purpose of amendment. 

It is all packed into that excellent little formula which is so easy to memorize.

If the priest is sufficiently assured that you are sorry and have a firm purpose of amendment even without hearing you say the Act of Contrition, he can absolve.

However, the priest in this case perhaps is unaware of the expectations and customs of confessing penitents in the USA.  He should be informed that it is expected that the priest invite the penitent to say the Act of Contrition, or at least start it, before he begins the form of absolution.

If you are concerned, you can always say your Act of Contrition after telling your sins even before you hear the priest’s counsel.  Perhaps if enough people do that, he will get the hint.   Otherwise, if you are doing your best to confess all your mortal sins, you are sorry for having committed them, and you are resolved not to commit them again, you are good to go!

Good to go after absolution and saying "Thank you!", of course!

"But Father! But Father!", I can hear some curious readers exclaiming. "You mention the Act of Contrition you prefer, but you only hint at what it is.  Tell us!  Which one do you use?"

This is what I say:

O my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended Thee and I detest all my sins because I dread the loss of heaven and the pains of hell, but most of all because they have offended Thee, my God, Who art all good and deserving of all my love. I firmly resolve with the help of Thy grace to confess my sins, to do penance, and to amend my life. Amen.

Posted in "But Father! But Father!", "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged , ,
49 Comments

Card. Canizares suggests lowering age of First Holy Communion?

This is worth a discussion.

I am not sure, but perhaps His Eminence is overly optimistic about the state of catechism today and the competence, therefore, of most parents to catechize their very young children?  

They need to be prepared for first confession before first Holy Communion too, right?

From CNA:

Vatican prefect says today’s world merits lower age for first communicants

Rome, Italy, Aug 9, 2010 / 05:15 am (CNA/EWTN News).- Children must not be deprived of the Eucharist, source of grace and assistance to them as they begin their walk with Jesus, stressed the Vatican prefect of the congregation for sacraments. In an article in L’Osservatore Romano to mark the 100-year anniversary of a papal decree which lowered the age of first communicants, Cardinal Antonio Cañizares underscored that children should still be allowed to receive the Eucharist as soon as they are able[Sounds about right.  As soon as they are able.]

The Vatican newspaper published an article by Cardinal Antonio Cañizares, the prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, titled "Jesus and the Children" on Sunday. In it, the cardinal remembered Pope St. Pius X’s "Quam singulari" decree from Aug. 8, 1910 which gave children the ability to receive the Eucharist once they had reached the "age of reason," deemed then at around seven years of age.

"With this decree … he taught the entire Church the meaning, the opportunity, the value and the centrality of Holy Communion for the life of all of the baptized, including children," wrote the cardinal prefect of St. Pius X.

"At the same time, he underscored and reminded everyone of the love and the predeliction of Jesus for children … ," added the cardinal, noting in from Bible passages that the youngest "are always very special friends of the Lord."

Emphasizing that there is "no greater love, no greater gift" than that of communion, he said that being with the Lord is "worth more than every other thing in the life of each man" and first communion, as the beginning of our "walk together with Jesus" should not be put off. [And FIRST PENANCE before First Holy Communion.]

"We cannot, (by) delaying first communion deprive children … of this grace, work and presence of Jesus, of this encounter of friendship with him, of this singular participation of Jesus himself to be able to mature and thus reach fullness."

In today’s world, he said, children are in great need of this sacrament and, "thanks to their immaculate and open souls," no one is more disposed than them to the union, friendship, strength and presence it offers.

Citing the 100th anniversary of Pope Pius X’s decree as a "providential occasion to remember and insist" on the fact that children can receive communion from the time they are able to reason, Cardinal Cañizares said that rather than continuing a trend which sees children receive communion ever later, if nothing else, today they should be able to receive it earlier than ever. [I am not so sure about that.  Are children better able to reason today than 100 years ago?  OR am I reading this wrong?  I get the sense from the English here and the original Italian that perhaps the Cardinal Prefect is suggesting that the age for Communion should be even before 7 years.]

"In the face of what is happening with children and to the very adverse environment in which they grow up, [An environment which perhaps stiffles their ability to reason?] let’s not deprive them of the gift of God," he concluded, " … it is the guarantee of their growth as children of God, generated by the sacraments of Christian initiation in the bosom of the holy Mother Church. The grace of of the gift of God is the most powerful of our works, and of our plans and programs."

And, today, he said, as Pope Pius X urged a century ago, "we must accompany this same ‘anticipation’ of age with a new and vigorous pastoral plan of Christian initiation."

 

Once upon a time in the USA, children organized their own games and were creative in their activities.   Does it not seem today that, when they are not being managed, they are stuck in front of a screen of some sort?

What does that do to "the ability to reason"?

Discuss.

UPDATE 1917 GMT:

The CNS coverage of this story assumes that Card. Canizares was suggesting 1st Communion "even before 7"
 

Posted in The Drill | Tagged , , ,
119 Comments

WDTPRS: 19th Sunday of Ordinary Time – COLLECT: sheer audacity

Let’s have a look at this daring prayer.

COLLECT – (2002MR):
Omnipotens sempiterne Deus,
quem paterno nomine invocare praesumimus,
perfice in cordibus nostris spiritum adoptionis filiorum,
ut promissam hereditatem ingredi mereamur
.

The Latin prayer was not in previous editions Missale Romanum before the 1970 Novus Ordo.  It has roots in the 9th century Sacramentary of Bergamo and thus is ancient text.  

Paternus, a, um is an adjective, “fatherly”.  Literally, a paternum nomen would be “Fatherly name”.  In English we need to break that down a little, just as we do with the Latin for “Sunday”: dies dominica or “lordly Day” in place of what we say “the day of the Lord”. In English a paternum nomen is “the name of Father”.  Latin uses adjectives and adverbs for more purposes than we do.  Our trusted old friend Lewis & Short Dictionary informs us that invoco means “to call upon, invoke” especially as a witness or as aid.  So, there is an element of urgency and humility in the word.   Praesumo gives us the English word and concept of “presumption”.  At its root it means, “to take before, take first or beforehand.”  The adverb and adjective prae, the prefix element of prae-sumo, is “before, in front of, in advance of”.  In a less physical sense it can mean “anticipate”, in the sense of “to imagine or picture to one’s self beforehand” or in a moral nuance “to presume, take for granted”.   It is even, more interestingly, “to undertake, venture, dare” together with “to trust, be confident”.  

LITERAL TRANSLATION:
Almighty eternal God,
whom we presume to invoke by the name of Father,
perfect in our hearts the spirit of the adoption of children,
so that we may merit to enter into the inheritance promised
.
 
Notice that I translate filii as “children” rather than as just “sons”, according to the literal meaning.  Latin masculine plurals, depending on the context, can also include females even though the form of the word is masculine.

During the Holy Mass, through the words, actions and intentions of the ordained priest, as a Church we presume with trusting audacity to consecrate bread and wine and change them substantially to the Body and Body of the Second Person of the Trinity.  

We do this because Jesus commanded us to do so, but it is a harrowing and consoling undertaking all the same. 

We are laying hands upon truly sacred things, the most sacred things there can be: Christ’s Body, Blood, soul and divinity. 

What could be more presumptuous? 

Two sections of the great Corpus Christi sequence by St. Thomas Aquinas (+1274) remind us of what is at stake when we approach the Blessed Sacrament for Communion (not my translation):  

“Here beneath these signs are hidden
priceless things, to sense forbidden;
signs, not things, are all we see.
Flesh from bread, and Blood from wine,
yet is Christ in either sign,
all entire confessed to be.
… Both the wicked and the good
eat of this celestial Food:
but with ends how opposite!
With this most substantial Bread,
unto life or death they’re fed,
in a difference infinite.” 

That last part bears repeating:  “Mors est malis, vita bonis: / vide paris sumptionis / quam sit dispar exitus."  

Eternal death for the wicked if they receive Communion improperly.  Eternal life for the good if they receive well.  See how dissimilar the different outcomes from the same act of Holy Communion can be?  This is good to ponder during Mass and the lead up to Mass:

Am I properly disposed to receive what Christ and the Church have promised are truly His Body and Blood?  Do I dare receive?  When was my last good confession?

Immediately after the Eucharistic Prayer but before our intrepid reception of Communion, we dare to pray with the words that the same Son taught us.

In introducing the Lord’s Prayer the priest says in Latin, “Having been instructed/urged by saving commands and formed by divine institution, we dare/presume (audemus) to say, ‘Our Father…’”.   Audeo is “to venture, to dare”, and in this it is a synonym of praesumo.   Jesus taught us to see God as Father in a way that no ever one had before.  Christ revolutionized our prayer.  In our lowliness we now dare to raise our eyes and venture to speak to God in a new way.  We come to Him as children of a new “sonship”.  

We learned from our examination of the Collect for the Third Sunday of Easter that adoptio is “adoption” in the sense of “to take as one’s child”.  We find the phrase in Paul: adoptionem filiorum Dei or “adoption of the sons of God” in the Latin Vulgate of Jerome (cf. Romans 8:23; Galatians 4:5; Ephesians 1:5).  

We do not approach God as fearful slaves.  We are now also able to receive Communion with reverent confidence provided we have prepared well.  God has done His part.

ICEL (1973 translation of the 1970MR):
Almighty and ever-living God,
you Spirit made us your children,
confident to call you Father.
Increase your Spirit within us
and bring us to our promised inheritance
.

Take careful note that the language of adoption has been expunged.  Does this change the impact of the prayer?  Does it present a different view of the Christian life than that presented in the Latin Collect?   

An important element of our Collect comes from Paul: “For you did not receive the spirit of slavery to fall back into fear, but you have received the spirit of sonship.  We can invoke God the Father with confidence, not fear, when we cry, ‘Abba! Father!’” (Romans 8:15… and “Abba” does not mean “daddy”).  

God will come to us not as a stranger God, but as a Father God.  What God does for us is not cold or impersonal.  It is an act of love.  Even in commanding us God the Son did not mean to terrify us into paralysis.  This, however, was the result for some who, when hearing Christ’s teaching about His flesh, left Him because what they heard was too hard (cf. John 6).   We need not be terrified… overwhelmed with awe, certainly, but not by terror.

Warned, urged, instructed by a divine Person who taught us with divine precepts, let’s get straight who our Father is and who we are because of who He is.   We are children of a loving Father.  He comes looking for us to draw us unto Him because of His fatherly heart.  The Holy Father Pope John Paul II wrote for the Church’s preparation for the Millennium Jubilee: “If God goes in search of man, created in his own image and likeness, he does so because he loves him eternally in the Word, and wishes to raise him in Christ to the dignity of an adoptive son” (Tertio millennio adveniente 6).  

As God’s adopted children we have dignity.  The adoption brought by the Spirit is not some second rate relationship with God or mere juridical slight of hand.  It is the fulfillment of an eternal love and longing.  This is a primary and foundational dimension of everything we are as Catholic Christians.  It is perhaps for this reason that that the Catechism of the Catholic Church speaks so clearly to this point, in the first paragraph.

The adoption we speak about in this Collect is something far more profound than a juridical act by which one who is truly not of the same blood and bone is therefore considered, legally, to be so.  Indeed some Protestants see our return to righteousness in God’s sight, that is, justification through baptism, in these terms: a sort of legal sleight of hand whereby we remain in reality guilty and corrupt, but our disgusting sinful nature is ignored by the Father because the merits of Christ are interposed between His eyes and our debased nature.  

However, we know by divine revelation and the continuing teaching of the Christian Church that by baptism more than a legal fiction takes place. 

We are more than justified, we are sanctified.  

Something of God’s divine grace is transferred to us, infused into our being so that we truly become sons and daughters of Almighty God, transformed radically from within, as members of Christ’s own Mystical Person.  Thus, we too share Christ’s sonship.  It is almost as if God infused His own DNA into us to make us His own in a sense far beyond any legal adoption could accomplish.  Astonishingly, this transformation alters who we are without removing our individuality or dignity as persons.  We are His and unified as One in Christ, and yet we remain ourselves.  We are integrated into a new structure of Communion, indeed a new family.  By our discordant actions we can make this earthly dimension of our supernatural family, our Church, dysfunctional.  

What a mystery it is that God, who lavishes upon us the mighty transforming graces we all have known and profess to love, leaves also in our hands the freedom to spurn Him and trivialize His gifts.  This freedom, itself a gift, could only be a Father’s gift to beloved children.

Posted in WDTPRS |
19 Comments

Sunday Supper 6 – Who knows? I now know… SALMON!

I am contemplating Sunday Supper 6.  I have had no time to shop and the Sunday company will be bringing groceries: mystery groceries.

Therefore I will be punting. 

But I have dragged out my big sauce book, which I haven’t used forever.  (Amazon shows that it is now in a 3rd printing and has a fancier cover.  But it is still enormous.) 

I will be flipping through and contemplating what to make if beef shows up, or pork, or fish, etc.

Veg and probably dessert will come from the garden.

UPDATE: The mystery ingredient was salmon – wild Koho Salmon.

What to do?

First stuff from the garden.  I turned to Julia Child’s volume 2 and found a recipe for Courgettes en Pistouille, which is based on an eggplant recipe.  Essentially you get the moisture out of zucchini and, in the meantime, create a base of sauteed peppers and onions, and tomato pulp.  You add a paste of garlic and basil to the sautee and then mix in your browned zucchini.

It is necessary to get a lot of the moisture out of the zucchini, or eggplant, etc. 

Peel the zucchini and cube and coat with salt.

After a while you can see the moisture gathering at the bottom. 

You do this so that when you cook it it won’t turn to mush.

In the meantime, I sweated together onions and peppers and tomatoes, all from the garden.

After browning the zucchini in olive oil, I combined them with a paste I made from garlic and fresh basil (from the garden).

Later I would add chopped parsley (from the garden). 

Dry your fresh herbs before you chop them so they don’t lose that immediate essential flavor into the water around them.

In the meantime I am making the sauce for the salmon.

Various stages are needed for this Coriander-Scented Clam Sauce.

You start a court-boullion of fennel and wine.  Reduce and later strain.

Start another pan of mushrooms and clam juice.  Reduce and strain.

Later, combine the two and reduce, whisking in heavy cream and the ground coriander with lemon juice (I didn’t have verjuice).

The coriander is also from the garden.

I used some of the fennel for a base for the salmon, white wine, and a touch of tomato paste.  I tented it and put it in the oven at 350F.

Now I am whisking in the cream and coriander.

I will strain this.

The straining was a problem.  I need a chinois.  I used a mesh coffee filter, but it was awkward, to say the least, and time consuming, which was worse.

Eventually, I got it all together with some chopped flat-leaf parsley.

This was served with Sauvignon Blanc.

I think, in retrospect the sauce was a bit too intense.  Next time I make it I will not reduce it so severely in its stages.

Also, I think I could have gone with a less aggressive bain for the salmon, but it was perfect.

The Sauvignon Blanc was from Frog’s Leap…. [insert shrug here] … ehhhhh.  Okay.  I would have preferred a Kim Crawford with less wood.

Sundays are special days.  Invite people.  Make a meal.  Sit together.  Eat together.  Do the work together.

It doesn’t have to be stuff like this, of course.  The important thing is that you are together.  I worked as a cook so some things come easier.  Stretch yourselves.  It really isn’t that hard.

And as the old Latin phrase goes:

Fabricando fabri fimus.

Perhaps this should be coquinando coqui fimus?

Yes, it should be. 

Posted in Fr. Z's Kitchen |
35 Comments

Dropping “Patriarch of the West” and changing titles of Roman Basilicas to “Papal”

Under another entry I had mentioned the move made by Pope Benedict a few years ago to change the titles of Major Roman Basilica’s from "Patriarchal" Basilicas to "Papal" Basilicas.  He left aside his title "Patriarch of the West". Commentators leapt on that issue, and so derailed the entry.

But I sense that there are some rich possibilities for discussion in the Holy Father’s moves.

Benedict XVI is the Pope of Christian Unity.

So, I open this entry with the purpose of providing an amicable discussion about the reasons behind and effects of Pope Benedict’s move to alter the titles of the Basilicas and to leave aside his title as Patriarch of the West.

Was this a helpful decision for ecumenical purposes?

Was this merely something internal to the West, Latins?

What theological implications could those changes have or represent?

Discuss.

Posted in Pope of Christian Unity | Tagged ,
68 Comments

New Jersey – 15 Aug: Solemn Mass sponsored by Mater Ecclesiae

I received this note from my good friend Fr. Robert Pasley, pastor of Mater Ecclesiae in Berlin, NJ where I have often been a guest.  Each year Mater Ecclesiae sponsors a Solemn Mass in the Extraordinary Form with exceptional sacred choral music for 15 August, the Feast of the Assumption.

Mater Ecclesiae, in the diocese of Camden New Jersey, has a national reputation.  The community was established by the Diocese of Camden on 13 October 2000, the anniversary of the final apparition of Our Lady at Fatima.  All Masses and Sacraments are celebrated according to the liturgical books of 1962.

Here are the details for this year’s Assumption Mass:

15 August at 1:00 PM
Saint Peter Roman Catholic Church
43 West Maple Avenue
Merchantville, NJ. 

The Music for the Mass:

  • Gregorian Propers
  • The Missa brevis septorum sanctorum dolorum B.V.M. by Carl Heinrich Biber
  • Alleluia Assumpta est  and the Dilexisti iustitiam by Heinrich Isaac
  • Offertorium de Sanctissimo Sacramento by Leopold Mozart, the father of A. Mozart
  • Dulcissima Maria – Francesco Guerrero
  • Sonata VII of Heinrich Isaac Biber
  • Ave Maria by Johann Joseph Fux
  • Sonata in D for two trumpets IV  and Sonata in D for two trumpets II by Franceschini
  • O Sanctissima and Hail Holy Queen arranged for Brass and Orchestra by Timothy McDonnell

For more information, please call 856-753-3408 or visit the website:  www.materecclesiae.org.

Posted in The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged ,
7 Comments

QUAERITUR: no confessionals and no confession times

From a reader:

I am requesting help re: the application of Canon 964.2 and 986.1 [which concerns the Seal].

The parish has been the host of a monthly homeschool Mass for a group from all over ____ for a few years.  They have just moved from a temporary building to a new church building, which the pastor has tried very hard to imbue with beauty and reverence.  There are no confessionals of any sort, however, and there are no scheduled confession times

He told a member of our group that the codes for handicapped access made the inclusion of a confessional too difficult; he has always only offered confessions by appointment.

May the two Canons above be dispensed with in this way?

Also, if the group were to contribute a portable confessional screen that he could sit behind, would that satisfy the requirements of 964.2?

First, I am not a canonist.  I consulted a canonist and I will adapt his response to me for my response.

You have the right to pursue recourse, especially if this is your territorial parish.

Regarding the confessional, the USCCB has not issued any norms, as per c. 964, to define the matter.  C. 964.2 is clear (confessionals must have a fixed screen between the penitent and the confessor so that the faithful can use them freely).   I have no idea what the fire code or building code says there.  On the other hand, mentioning the building code has been used as dodge before.
 
Perhaps you could approach the pastor with the proposal that he and others could help build a portable screen.  That would not violate any building code.   And what building code would prohibit the erection of a decent confessional so long as it is accessible and not a fiery death trap of flaming fiery entrapped death?

As far as the times available for confession are concerned, perhaps a gentle reminder to the pastor – not citing Canon Law – that he and a group would like to know a stable time each week when a confessor will be available for confession, since they’d like to go regularly at a predictable time, and they don’t want to "pester" him for appointments. If enough people start going weekly (say, 6-10?) at a stable time, the pastor might see concrete evidence of why regular confession time in the schedule would be valuable.   There is a vicious circle: if people are going, they pastor will maybe not be motivated to sit in the box.  If the pastor does not sit in the box, people won’t come.
 
That said, I think we have to have a little sympathy for pastors of parishes when they may not have assistants or visiting priests to help.  You can see why sometimes they schedule brief periods.   On the other hand, my experience is that some of these pastors do not value the sacrament of penance.  They are the guys who tend to schedule confessions "From 9:00 a.m. to 9:03 a.m. on the second Thursday of months ending in R". 

I would only bring up Canon Law and consider going over Father’s head to the local Bishop or to Rome if Father is stubborn and refuses to cooperate with the possibility of building some sort of a screen and/or offering some accommodation to a group that wants to confess on a regular basis at a regular time at their regular parish where they are parishioners.

Also, it sounds as if the priest is interested in the beauty proper to a church building.  This is a good sign.  Is it likely that he will get around to confessionals soon?

You have to weigh the factors with prudence and due regard for the circumstance and exigencies the priest faces and then try to work it out as peacefully as possible.

Bottom line: help find solutions by your own efforts with others rather than simply make demands on the priest without providing concrete help.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box | Tagged ,
45 Comments

Useless kitchen stuff for morons

For those of you who follow my kitchen posts, be sure to check out The Motley Monk and his comments on useless kitchen gadgets morons might buy.

It’s a hoot.

For example:

and don’t forget…

And while this might be useful to instruct young people that, yes, we set the table in polite company, I object to the lack of indication for the cuillère à sauce individuelle!  

But we can adapt. 

We are flexible.

So it is not exactly for morons, if you get my drift.

Posted in Lighter fare |
13 Comments