Fr. Z's Blog | Formerly entitled: "What Does The Prayer Really Say?" – Clear, straight commentary on Catholic issues, liturgy and life by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf o{]:¬)

MARS LANDING SOON! Gravity of Mars is now pulling Curiosity.

Posted on 4 August 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From the JPL:

Mars Tugging on Approaching NASA Rover Curiosity

August 04, 2012

PASADENA, Calif. – The gravitational tug of Mars is now pulling NASA’s car-size geochemistry laboratory, Curiosity, in for a suspenseful landing in less than 40 hours. [About 35 as I write.]

“After flying more than eight months and 350 million miles since launch, the Mars Science Laboratory spacecraft is now right on target to fly through the eye of the needle that is our target at the top of the Mars atmosphere,” said Mission Manager Arthur Amador of NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.

The spacecraft is healthy and on course for delivering the mission’s Curiosity rover close to a Martian mountain at 10:31 p.m. Sunday, Aug. 5 PDT (1:31 a.m. Monday, Aug. 6 EDT). That’s the time a signal confirming safe landing could reach Earth, give or take about a minute for the spacecraft’s adjustments to sense changeable atmospheric conditions.

The only way a safe-landing confirmation can arrive during that first opportunity is via a relay by NASA’s Mars Odyssey orbiter. Curiosity will not be communicating directly with Earth as it lands, because Earth will set beneath the Martian horizon from Curiosity’s perspective about two minutes before the landing.

[…]

Read the rest there.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged Curiosity, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, JPL, Mars Rover, rover
8 Comments

Some notes to review before the LCWR Assembly in St. Louis

Posted on 4 August 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The long-anticipated annual assembly of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious will soon begin in St. Louis, MO. The local ordinary, Archbp. Robert Carlson is slated to speak at the assembly. There is an article about the assembly at the site of the Archdiocese of St. Louis. At the end of the article is a brief timeline for the LCWR:

Timeline of LCWR

1956: The Conference of Major Superiors of Women was founded as the sole canonical conference for U.S. superiors of women religious.
1970-71:
The Conference of Major Superiors of Women is restructured and changes its name to the Leadership Conference of Women Religious.
1971:
Some nuns who disapprove of LCWR’s new directions create a new organization, the Consortium Perfectae Caritatis. In the early 1970s the consortium seeks recognition from Rome as an alternative conference to
the LCWR.
1974: The Vatican Congregation for Religious calls representatives of the two groups to Rome to try to sort
out differences and improve dialogue. The Vatican rules that LCWR will remain the sole canonical conference for U.S. superiors of women religious.
March 1989: At a Rome summit, Cardinal James A. Hickey of Washington gives a talk on the “crisis” in U.S. religious life. He says women who do not belong to LCWR “desire some representation with the Holy See.”
Fall 1991: A group of superiors, led by Carmelite Mother Vincent Marie Finnegan, decides to form a new council that will receive canonical recognition from the Vatican.
June 1992: Cardinal Hickey and Mother Vincent Marie jointly announce that the Council of Major Superiors of Women Religious has been approved by the Vatican.
April 2008: Toledo Bishop Leonard P. Blair Vatican is named by the doctrinal congregation to carry out a “doctrinal assessment” of the “activities and initiatives” of LCWR.
April 2012: Vatican announces major reform of LCWR, citing “serious doctrinal problems which affect many in consecrated life.”

I invite the readers to review the following:

Nuns Gone Wild: A Trip Down Memory Lane

The reason for that is to familiarize you with the prominent sisters who shaped the leadership of the LCWR. Know them and know the present leaders. The leaders of the LCWR are unwilling to work in the public square in support of the Church’s teaching on homosexuality and abortion. This year they are honoring a public lesbian by having her address their assembly.

And:

Sr. Sandra Schneider’s NunThink, or, Why The CDF Is Picking On The Magisterium of Nuns

The leaders of the LCWR are more social workers than they are theologians. They obtain their “theological” (if we can use the term loosely) underpinnings from women such as Sr. Sandra Schneiders. Her book is a bizarre twisting of texts of the Council and post-Conciliar documents until they have no resemblance to their actual meaning. The leaders of the LCWR have been formed by Schneider’s work. They aren’t theologians. They channel Schneiders, who is a bad theologian. This year the LCWR is giving their Outstanding Leadership Award to Sr. Schneiders. What this reveals is their radical stance against the actual documents of the Second Vatican Council. For all their bluster about how they are upholding the Council, they are actually upholding ideas that are a distortion of what the Council said about consecrated life and the institution of the Church.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged Archbp. Carlson, Archd. St. Louis, LCWR, Leadership Conference of Women Religious
3 Comments

Wherein women can comment about clothing and modesty.

Posted on 4 August 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Another entry is being derailed into a discussion of women’s clothing and modesty. It’s a great topic, but was a rabbit hole.

Therefore, I am opening this entry here. I will now back out slowly of the room, while whispering the ever provocative …

“… chapel veil…”

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged chapel veils, clothing, immodesty, mantilla, modesty, tarts
168 Comments

November meeting for Summorum Pontificum

Posted on 4 August 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From the intrepid Andrea Tornielli of Vatican Insider with my emphases and comments.

Year of Faith: The first meeting of faithful in favour of the rules of the “Summorum Pontificum” has been called for 3 November and will take place in the Vatican. The faithful are hoping for a speech from the Pope

ANDREA TORNIELLI
VATICAN CITY

The faithful who follow the traditional Latin rite of Mass thanks to the Summorum Pontificum, the Apostolic Letter issued “motu proprio” by Benedict XVI IN 2007, will meet in Rome for a pilgrimage linked to the Year of Faith. The pilgrimage will conclude with a Mass celebration in St. Peter’s Basilica. The news was announced in the last few hours. [Actually, I think we have known this for a while.]

“Various representatives of groups of lay faithful, including the international federation One Voice and the Italian Summorum Pontificum’s National Coordination office have just instituted the “Coetus internationalis pro Summorum Pontificum” in Rome. The purpose of this is to organise an international pilgrimage of pro Summorum Pontificum associations, groups and movements during the Year of Faith. The pilgrimage will end with a Mass celebration in St. Peter’s on Saturday 3 November 2012. An official presentation of the event will be given on 10 September.”

Organisers have explained that the event is intended as “a big mobilization initiative in Rome, leading all faithful who are devoted to the Holy Liturgy and the Holy Father, the Pope, on a pilgrimage of prayer. Now more than ever, with all the attacks on his sacred person, the Pope is in need of our unanimous manifestation of affection, obedience and charitable support. Let the organising begin.” [Do I hear an “Amen!”?]

This will not the first time the Latin Rite Mass of 1962 – according to the last of the Missals that precede the post-conciliar liturgical reform – celebrated in St. Peter’s. German cardinal Walter Brandmüller presided over a traditional rite mass in St. Peter’s Basilica on 17 March 2011, at the end of a convention on the Summorum Pontificum issued “motu proprio” in Rome.

Organisers said nothing about a potential meeting with the Pope, although the Coetus internationalis pro Summorum Pontificum is hoping that Benedict XVI will be present and greet pilgrims who will come to Rome from all across the world.

[And now some statistics…] In September 2010, three years after the implementation of the “motu proprio”, the Paix Liturgique group published some figures on the situation in a newsletter. The quantitative and qualitative study concerned thirty countries where Catholicism has the strongest presence. It looked into the number of traditional masses on offer, their frequency and the times held, to assess for example whether these times were convenient for families. The situation was monitored in Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Switzerland, the Czech Republic, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, Poland, France, the Netherlands, Hungary, Austria, Canada, the United States, Mexico, Colombia, Chile, Brazil, Argentina, Australia, India, the Philippines, New Zealand, South Africa, Gabon and Nigeria.

The data was obtained from two independent sources. The findings revealed that the Tridentine Mass is celebrated in 1.444 locations. Of these, 340 celebrate mass once a week; 313 celebrate Sunday mass but not regularly, so not every week; 324 celebrate mass every Sunday but at times that are not convenient for families (so not between 9 and 12). Finally, 467 places celebrate mass every Sunday at family friendly times. Essentially, one in three masses are family friendly (32, 3%), whilst one in four masses is not celebrated on Sunday.

An interesting comparison can be drawn between the masses celebrated by the Society of St. Pius X, not taken into account in the first figure which did take into consideration masses celebrated according to Benedict XVI’s “motu proprio”. Lefebvrian groups organise a total of 690 masses and one in two of these is celebrated according to Benedict XVI’s “motu proprio” and in full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. Despite the difficulties and the resistance shown, a growing number of people are slowly becoming familiar with the Traditional Rite Mass.

For years I have suggested that, if Benedict XVI for whatever reason chooses not to celebrate according to the Extraordinary Form himself, perhaps His Holiness would deign to be present at such a Holy Mass, so that it might be celebrated coram Pontifice. That sort of Mass has its own complexities, but they could be waved. Hey! He is the Roman Pontiff, after all.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged Benedict XVI, Card. Brandmuller, Coetus internationalis pro Summorum Pontificum, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM
8 Comments

“Certain offices in human society require the officeholder to be loved and feared of men.”

Posted on 4 August 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Here is a little Patristiblogger offering for your midday consideration.

This morning a priest friend and I were talking about the problems of leadership and being hated, loved, or feared.

Classic question: Is it better to be loved or feared?

Machiavelli had his answer, and you can imagine what it was and why he wrote it.

St. Augustine of Hippo, however, tackled this problem in Book 10 of The Confessions.

While remaining a realist, and writing as a Catholic bishop, Augustine has a different take. He asks, what is the object of the love the subject has, and the object of the fear?

Here is an excerpt of Confessiones 10.36.59. Shall we hear it? A little Latin with your English pony:

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

sed numquid, domine, qui solus sine typho dominaris, quia solus verus dominus es, qui non habes dominum, numquid hoc quoque tertium temptationis genus cessavit a me aut cessare in hac tota vita potest, timeri et amari velle ab hominibus, non propter aliud sed ut inde sit gaudium quod non est gaudium? misera vita est et foeda iactantia; hinc fit vel maxime non amare te nec caste timere te, ideoque tu superbis resistis, humilibus autem das gratiam, et intonas super ambitiones saeculi, et contremunt fundamenta montium. itaque nobis, quoniam propter quaedam humanae societatis officia necessarium est amari et timeri ab hominibus, instat adversarius verae beatitudinis nostrae, ubique spargens in laqueis `euge! euge!’ ut, dum avide conligimus, incaute capiamur et a veritate tua gaudium nostrum deponamus atque in hominum fallacia ponamus, libeatque nos amari et timeri non propter te sed pro te, atque isto modo sui similes factos secum habeat, non ad concordiam caritatis sed ad consortium supplicii, qui statuit sedem suam ponere in aquilone, ut te perversa et distorta via imitanti tenebrosi frigidique servirent. nos autem, domine, pusillus grex tuus ecce sumus, tu nos posside. praetende alas tuas, et fugiamus sub eas. gloria nostra tu esto; propter te amemur et verbum tuum timeatur in nobis. qui laudari vult ab hominibus vituperante te, non defendetur ab hominibus iudicante te nec eripietur damnante te. cum autem non peccator laudatur in desideriis animae suae, nec qui iniqua gerit benedicetur, sed laudatur homo propter aliquod donum quod dedisti ei, at ille plus gaudet sibi laudari se quam ipsum donum habere unde laudatur, etiam iste te vituperante laudatur, et melior iam ille qui laudavit quam iste qui laudatus est. illi enim placuit in homine donum dei, huic amplius placuit donum hominis quam dei.

59. But, O Lord–thou who alone reignest without pride, because thou alone art the true Lord, who hast no Lord–has this third kind of temptation left me, or can it leave me during this life: the desire to be feared and loved of men, with no other view than that I may find in it a joy that is no joy? It is, rather, a wretched life and an unseemly ostentation. It is a special reason why we do not love thee, nor devotedly fear thee. Therefore “thou resistest the proud but givest grace to the humble.” [1 Peter 5:5] Thou thunderest down on the ambitious designs of the world, and “the foundations of the hills” tremble. [Cf. Ps. 18:7, 13] And yet certain offices in human society require the officeholder to be loved and feared of men, and through this the adversary of our true blessedness presses hard upon us, scattering everywhere his snares of “well done, well done”; so that while we are eagerly picking them up, we may be caught unawares and split off our joy from thy truth and fix it on the deceits of men. In this way we come to take pleasure in being loved and feared, not for thy sake but in thy stead. By such means as this, the adversary makes men like himself, that he may have them as his own, not in the harmony of love, but in the fellowship of punishment–the one who aspired to exalt his throne in the north, [Cf. Isa. 14:12-14] that in the darkness and the cold men might have to serve him, mimicking thee in perverse and distorted ways. But see, O Lord, we are thy little flock. Possess us, stretch thy wings above us, and let us take refuge under them. Be thou our glory; let us be loved for thy sake, and let thy word be feared in us. Those who desire to be commended by the men whom thou condemnest will not be defended by men when thou judgest, nor will they be delivered when thou dost condemn them. But when–not as a sinner is praised in the wicked desires of his soul nor when the unrighteous man is blessed in his unrighteousness–a man is praised for some gift that thou hast given him, and he is more gratified at the praise for himself than because he possesses the gift for which he is praised, such a one is praised while thou dost condemn him. In such a case the one who praised is truly better than the one who was praised. For the gift of God in man was pleasing to the one, while the other was better pleased with the gift of man than with the gift of God.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Mail from priests, Patristiblogging | Tagged adversarius, amari et timeri, conf. 10.36.59, confessions, fear, leadership, Patristiblogging, praise, St. Augustine, The Devil
9 Comments

Archbp. Sartain offered to attend LCWR Assembly. In a spirit of dialogue, The Nuns rejected his gesture.

Posted on 4 August 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The other day in the National Catholic Register, I read a piece about the upcoming annual assembly of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR – a subsidiary of the Magisterium of Nuns). The writer, Ann Carey, is all over this topic. She has commanding knowledge of the LCWR types. Check out her fine book Sisters in Crisis: The Tragic Unraveling of Women’s Religious Communities.

In her NCReg piece, which you should read in full, there is this interesting bit (my emphases and comments):

The LCWR board responded to the mandate in a June 1 press release, complaining that the assessment “was based on unsubstantiated accusations and the result of a flawed process that lacked transparency.”

[LCWR Pres.] Sister Pat said Archbishop Sartain [appointed by the CDF to over see the LCWR’s overhauling…] will not attend the assembly, but the LCWR will inform him of any decision the assembly reaches before that information is released to the press.

According to Mercy Sister Mary Ann Walsh, director of media relations for the bishops’ conference, [NB:] Archbishop Sartain offered to come to the assembly, but he was told his presence “would not be helpful.” [Get that? Can you imagine? But they don’t want him there because they are going to dialogue about dialoguing. I, by the way, am still waiting for my invitation.]

One reporter referred to a July 24 NPR interview with Bishop Blair that was a follow-up to the Sister Pat interview. In that interview, Bishop Blair was asked about Sister Pat’s wish to dialogue on the issues in the mandate. He had replied that if the LCWR wanted to negotiate the doctrines of the Church that was not the kind of discussion the Holy See envisioned. The reporter asked Sister Pat if that was an accurate representation of the LCWR position, and she replied:

“I would also say that there are very few doctrines in the Church that are not discussable, that are absolutely infallible. [?!?] And I think those kinds of commentaries [the NPR interviews] are a reflection of a slightly different perspective that we have on obedience.

“And as I have stated in other interviews, one of our concerns is that questioning is seen as defiance, and that’s not healthy for our Church, nor is it our intention. And that our sense of our own fidelity [Our Fidelity – Our Selves] means that we continue raising and responding to questions, according to our own consciences and according to new information and questions that arise in our day.” [Tota mea!]

Sister Pat told the press conference: “The one thing that I think we’ve constantly communicated is that we … in however we respond to this [CDF mandate], we want to help create a safe and respectful environment, [There’s that “safe” BS again. This is feminist code language gleaned from the Andrea Dworkin types.] where Church leaders and grassroots Catholics can raise questions openly and search together for truth freely to the very complex issues of our time.
“Anything that we can do in the way that we respond to this that could contribute to the climate of open and deeper dialogue in the Church is one of our greatest hopes.” [And the buzz words just pile up higher and higher and higher.]

What a farce this assembly is.

Friends, no matter what the nuns claim, this whole mess with the CDF and American bishops is not about bishops having power over nuns, or men being over women.

The problem is that the LCWR types are “moving beyond Jesus”. They are drifting out Christianity.

That looks like hyperbole when I state it this starkly, but this is really where they are going.

I don’t think these nuns even realize where they are going.

When you come right down to it, their problem is – ironically – with the documents of Vatican II! They really have a problem with Lumen gentium on the constitution of the Church. They don’t know who the Church is and who they are in the Church. They no longer understand what consecrated life is (they think they are “prophetic” and therefore are allowed to “question” any teaching and are free from the “institutional” Church and hierarchy) and they have forgotten who their Lord is (they are moving beyond Jesus).

And their real enemy is Vatican II. They have more problems with Vatican II than the Lefevbrists have. We will probably reach an accord with the SSPX before the LCWR is squared away.

I know where they are going. The LCWR gals are on a train, zooming down the track straight toward a canyon, and the bridge is out.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged Archbp. Sartain, CDF, LCWR, Leadership Conference of Women Religious, magisterium of nuns, Sr. Pat Farrell
59 Comments

4 August: St. Dominic

Posted on 4 August 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

According to the traditional Roman calendar, today is the feast of St. Dominic. Happy feast to all Dominicans and Dominics.

As I work systematically through my list of intentions for Holy Masses, today brought up His Eminence Raymond Card. Burke!

I am pleased to have a 1st class relic of St. Dominic, which observed his Mass today. It is the smaller reliquary on the right.

Posted in Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM | Tagged relics, St. Dominic
8 Comments

I know it is hard

Posted on 4 August 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

After hours of broadcasting the Olympics and commenting on events, your brain must deflate. But surely you can still do better than:

“She needs to avoid making mistakes and do her best.”

No! Really?

I hope for better during the track and field events.

Maybe we’ll hear:

“He wants to run as fast as he can!”

Or maybe,

“If only she can jump higher than the rest of the field, she’ll take home a medal, Jim.”

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
30 Comments

Of molluscacide and cinema. Of opening up and digging in.

Posted on 3 August 2012 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

On my break from my sorting and throwing, I set my DVR to the Olympics (so that I could skip the, tarnation, commercials). I cooked and ate and watched a movie.

For supper, I had mussels, steamed in white wine and Sambuca, garlic and parsley and chives.

Mussels are a favorite light supper. They are fun and easy and tasty. When you buy them, make sure to ask the fishmonger when they came in. If they were more than two days, buy something else. Ask the fishmonger to sort them. Think in terms of a pound per person. If the fishmonger is worth her salt-water seafood, she’ll put a little ice in with the critters. Get them home swiftly and into the fridge. You may have to scrub them off a little and “de-beard” them…no, nothing of Richard III … which reference will have greater significance below.

Give them a nice soak in water, so they’ll give up any sand they have. I do this a couple times. In the meantime, in a big pan you can cover tightly, I start with a tiny bit of olive oil, a tablespoon of finely chopped onion, and a couple cloves of minced garlic, a splash of white wine.

This time I added my own blend of dried Fine Herbes and then some Sambuca. Variations are nearly endless. Start the concoction to boil add the be-shelled critters, clamp down the lid, and wait. I like to put my ear close to the lid and listen for the grisly chorus of the their little screams of agony. Just kidding… they don’t scream in agony. Even if they did, who cares? I’m the top of the food chain. Hint: to help get over any squeamishness, it helps to name them individually.

They will open up pretty quickly, if you started the boil ahead of time. A glass lid helpful. Do NOT try to pry open and eat any that didn’t open. No. Really.

“But Father! But Father!” you are saying, “You are a mean molluscacide! I will never eat mussels. You are against Vatican II. … but… What movie were you watching? Probably something patriarchal.”

Yes.

The King’s Speech.

This is a great movie, which bears many viewings. It is one of three movies I have seen in the last 20 years or so after which no one left the theater, but watched the full credits. There are layers and layers of meaning. There is so much parent/child baggage in this, it rends the heart.

For me, we get in the movie – aside from any historical accuracies or inaccuracies – a beautiful profile of true courage. Historically, “Bertie” had to step up in a critical time, with disadvantages, in the view of his whole country. I like to think that the courage of the father of the present queen, who in a spirit service tackled his greatest fears in the sense of duty, inspired her through the last six decades.

The cast… can it be better than this? Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush, Helena Bonham Carter, Derek Jacobi, Michael Gambon, Claire Bloom, Guy Pearce and Eve Best as Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson – creepy accurate, Timothy Spall, Anthony Andrews.

The dialogue is also terribly witty. A sample:

Bertie starts to light a cigarette from a silver case.

LIONEL: Don’t do that.

Bertie gives him an astonished look.

BERTIE: I’m sorry?

LIONEL: Sucking smoke into your lungs will kill you.

BERTIE: My physicians say it relaxes the throat.

LIONEL: They’re idiots.

BERTIE: They’ve all been knighted.

LIONEL: Makes it official then. My “castle,” my rules.

And the scene when Myrtle comes home early… brilliant.

As the new King is watching a film reel of Hitler during a rally, little future Queen Elizabeth asks what he is saying. Bertie says, “I don’t know, but he seems to be saying it rather well.” With something of the Faramir about him, he watches with riveted and knowing trepidation.

Another point: the abdication of Edward. The film underscores the contrast of duty and selfishness. Edward (David) is set to do something that his Church – of which he is laughably the head – is wrong. If he cannot force the Church to conform to him, he will abandon his duty. Of course the Church of England, tied to the state, must inevitably follow common mores and trends. Damning, really. But I digress.

There are, by the way, good recordings of the real players available on YouTube. Fascinating. And still in living history, though fading.

Back to sorting and the Olympics.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Fr. Z's Kitchen |
26 Comments