QUAERITUR: Father makes stuff up during Mass.

QUAERITUR: Father makes stuff up during Mass.From a reader:

At my parish, when the priest is done reading the Gospel, he says not only “the Gospel of the Lord” but “the Good News, the Gospel of the Lord“. Also, when Mass is ended, our priest says “May Almighty God bless US, the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit“. Regarding the first point, is he “allowed” to say that or is that an example of the typical occurrence wherein the priest adds his own spin on things? And regarding the second point, isn’t he, in persona Christi, blessing the congregation, not simply declaring that he wants God to bless humanity of which we and he are a part (and therefore ought to say “you” rather than “us”)?

This isn’t too high on the Things To Worry About scale.

Nevertheless, it is a Say The Black – Do The Red moment, isn’t it?

Why is this hard?

What Father is doing is wrong.  The Church has prescribed texts for these moments.  At the end of the Gospel the priest or deacon is to say (in English) … why do I even have to write this? …  “The Gospel of the Lord.” He is to say that. THAT. Not, “This is the Gospel of the Lord.” Not “The Good News, the Gospel of the Lord”. But, “The Gospel of the Lord.”
Why is that hard?

At the end of Mass the priest is required to say: “May almighty God bless you, the Father, and the Son, + and the Holy Spirit.” Just that. Nothing else. Bishops have their own text, but that is what priests are to say. They are not to make up their own words. They are not to create new texts. They are not to abuse the congregation by imposing their pet projects.

Is this hard?

If the priest keeps doing this, write to the bishop.  Then it is his problem and he can chose what to do about it as the “chief liturgist” of the diocese and you will have done your part according to Redemptionis Sacramentum 183-184.

QUAERITUR: Father makes stuff up during Mass.

 

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Priests and Priesthood | Tagged , , , , ,
9 Comments

Watching Curiosity Land. Just Too Cool

This was so cool. I stayed up to watch the landing of the Mars Rover. I felt like a little kid again.

Watching Curiosity Land. Just Too Cool

Watching Curiosity Land. Just Too Cool

Watching Curiosity Land. Just Too Cool

Watching Curiosity Land. Just Too Cool

Watching Curiosity Land. Just Too Cool

First images:

Watching Curiosity Land. Just Too Cool

UPDATE

New photos from Mars Rover Curiositas:

Watching Curiosity Land. Just Too Cool

UPDATE:

I watched it again and it gave me goose-flesh, again.

[wp_youtube]E88d4e1gYh0[/wp_youtube]

Shorter, of just the landing:

[wp_youtube]cZlo0wHx9bk[/wp_youtube]

In the meantime, doesn’t Marvin remind you of a liberal Jesuit?

No?

[wp_youtube]7A4HeawmE6A[/wp_youtube]

Posted in Just Too Cool, Look! Up in the sky!, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged , , , , ,
12 Comments

Your Sunday Sermon Notes

Was there a good point in the Sunday Sermon you heard?

Let us know what it was.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
21 Comments

Curiosity to land on Mars TONIGHT!

I plan to watch the live stream of the Curiosity landing tonight.

You?

If you haven’t seen it yet, here is a video from the JPL about the terrifying landing stage:

[wp_youtube]pzqdoXwLBT8[/wp_youtube]

Posted in Just Too Cool, Look! Up in the sky!, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged , ,
14 Comments

QUAERITUR: Form of absolution was just “I absolve you of your sins.”

QUAERITUR: Form of absolution was just "I absolve you of your sins."From a reader:

I went to confession at a neighboring parish that had recently received a 70-something priest who I know to be a bit free-wheeling as far as anything liturgical or doctrinal. This made me nervous going, but I needed to go.

Confession went as usual, but after giving a penance, He simply said, “I absolve you of your sins” and that was it. No sign of the cross or anything. I asked if I was to make an act of contrition, and he replied that I could if I liked. After I had finished, I asked him if he would give me absolution in the words of the Church (I figured this was a bit forward, but at the same time I didn’t want to wonder about validity or re-confess). He said that he had, so I saw no point and thanked him and left. Ultimately, I am wondering if this is valid, if I was too forward, and if there is anything that should be done if his manner of absolution is invalid.

That was valid.  You were not too forward to ask for the Church’s proper form.  And there is, in fact, something to be done.

The formula of absolution is, in its short form, “Ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis, in nomine Patris +, et Filii, et Spiritus Sancti… I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father +, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.”   This is the last part of a longer formula, which in translation is, “God, the Father of Mercies, through the death and resurrection of his Son has reconciled the world to himself and sent the Holy Spirit among us for the forgiveness of sins; through the ministry of the Church may God give you pardon and peace, and I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.”  The short version suffices by itself in a pinch.  More and more priests these days are using the older, traditional form of absolution as well.

That said, St. Thomas Aquinas argues (though his opinions are not the equivalent of the Church’s Magisterium – never forget that!) that “Ego te absolvo”  is the form of the sacrament (ST III, Q. 84, Art. 3).  If he is right, then that may suffice.

The Catechism of the Council of Trent, reliable and surely an expression of the Church’s Magisterium, and surely working from Aquinas has this:

Pastors should not neglect to explain the form of the Sacrament of Penance. A knowledge of it will excite the faithful to receive the grace of this Sacrament with the greatest possible devotion. Now the form is: I absolve thee, as may be inferred not only from the words, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth shall be bound also in heaven, but also from the teaching of Christ our Lord, handed down to us by the Apostles.

QUAERITUR: Form of absolution was just "I absolve you of your sins."These days it seems that the minimum form in the Latin Church (the Eastern Churches have their own somewhat different practices) is “Ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis… I absolve you from your sins.”  As far as I can tell, this is what most authors stand by.  Because I am an Unreconstructed Ossified Manualist, I consulted several manuals (e.g., Tanquerey, Prümmer, Sabetti Barrett).  They all come to the same basic conclusion.  “Absolvo te a peccatis tus” is certainly valid, and “Absolvo te” is probably valid, but if possible the longer form should be repeated to be sure.

Part of the problem here  – aside from the arrogance of priests who screw around with the form of absolution – is the notion of using regularly the bare minimum.  That suggests that perhaps the rest is not so important.

If you confess to a priest who regularly does something dodgy with the form of absolution, I would politely bring it up, as you did. People are within their rights to have the form of absolution spoken as it is in the book. Ask the priest to give you absolution with the proper form. Do not be nasty or aggressive about this.

If that doesn’t help, talk to the pastor of the parish and/or the local bishop.

Remember that the priest himself cannot talk about the confession because he is bound by the Seal.  Therefore, you can politely inform the the bishop about your experience of the form of absolution.  You would have to include that you have been to this priest several times and that he has always done the same thing.  Do not run him down.  Do not add lots of observations.  Do not try to teach the bishop his job or theology.

Ideally, the bishop (or pastor) would then have a chat with the priest during which the priest would be informed that word had come that he isn’t using the proper form of absolution and, if true, that should be corrected – lest in the future he receive in spades the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing.

If that doesn’t produce results, send a copy of your correspondence to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (not Divine Worship) and seek a clarification.

QUAERITUR: Form of absolution was just "I absolve you of your sins."

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged , , , , , , ,
9 Comments

This is where liberal dissent leads: liberals give the Eucharist to a dog.

From theage.com.au.

Note in the second paragraph of the story that, at this blasphemous and sacrilegious “Mass”, the dissidents gave the Eucharist to a dog.

Let’s not be speciesist, after all.  This is where dissent leads.

Note that this priest has already had his faculties removed.  It could be that additional censures are now in order.

This is where liberal dissent leads: liberals give the Eucharist to a dog.

All creatures great and small: Father Greg Reynolds leads Mass at the Inclusive Catholics service in South Yarra, where one first-time visitor brought his dog along.

Dissidents preach a new breed of Catholicism
August 6, 2012
Barney Zwartz

FATHER Greg Reynolds wants his church of dissident Catholics to welcome all – ”every man and his dog”, one might say, risking the non-inclusive language he deplores – but even he was taken aback when that was put to the test during Mass yesterday.
A first-time visitor arrived late at the Inclusive Catholics service in South Yarra with a large and well-trained German shepherd. When the consecrated bread and wine were passed around, the visitor took some bread and fed it to his dog.
Apart from one stifled gasp, those present showed admirable presence of mind – but the dog was not offered the cup!
Father Reynolds, a Melbourne priest for 32 years, launched Inclusive Catholics earlier this year. He now ministers to up to 40 people at fortnightly services alternating between two inner-suburban Protestant churches.

The congregation includes gay men, former priests, abuse victims and many women who feel disenfranchised, but it is optimistic rather than bitter.

Yesterday a woman, Irene Wilson, led the liturgy and another, Emmy Silvius, preached the homily. Two more passed the bread and wine around.

Father Reynolds – his only clerical adornment a green stole around his neck – played as small a role as he could.
Inclusive Catholics is part of a small but growing trend in the West of disaffiliated Catholics forming their own communities and offering ”illicit” Masses, yet are slightly uncertain of their identities. [D’ya think?] The question was posed during the service: ”Are we part of the church or are we a breakaway movement?”

Father Reynolds was a thorn in the side of Melbourne Archbishop Denis Hart when he preached in 2010 that it was God’s will to have women priests. He resigned as Western Port parish priest last August and had his faculties to act as a priest in Melbourne removed.

[…]

Posted in Dogs and Fleas, Liberals, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged , , , , ,
55 Comments

Are the LCWR and lefty mainstream media distracting attention from abuse of children by women religious?

My friend The Motley Monk has a must read piece at American Catholic about the LCWR and what is, and isn’t, behind the recent “hostile takeover” by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

Read the whole thing THERE, but here is the clincher:

[…]

Is the “crackdown,” as it’s being suggested, “pay back” for the grief the LCWR has caused the American hierarchy for the past several decades?

The Motley Monk thinks maybe not. [Fr. Z thinks not.]

With the leftist media linking the hostile takeover of the LCWR to the pedophilia and ephebophophilia scandal, The Motley Monk wonders whether operatives of the American Catholic left and their media outlets are [Here it is:] attempting to distract attention away from what’s a very important question that’s not being asked, at least in public: What was the LCWR’s role, if any, in a glossing over—if not a coverup—of pedophilia and ephebophilia on the part of Catholic women religious? [Yep.]

Check out how Sr. Joan D. Chittister, OSB, the 1976 LCWR President,  avoids the question (begin at 9:05) [I advise you to put down your WDTPRS coffee mug lest you throw it through your monitor.]

(This video is no longer available.)

Promoting the narrative that the women religious were 100% “pure as the driven snow” as they set about effecting greater “peace with justice” in the post-Vatican II era, the media’s sole focus became the alleged machinations of evil clergymen who engaged in an unconscionable covering up of the pedophilia and ephebophilia scandals.  There’d be little reason to suspect that women religious—and especially the LCWR—would ever engage in similar heinous behavior. [Is that so?  I have in the past posted about that issue here.]

Perhaps CNN’s Christiane Amanpour didn’t do her homework. [There’s a shocker.]

Doctrinal heterodoxy may not be all that’s problematic with the LCWR.  It may very well be that the “Nuns [are] on the Run from the Truth,” as Frances Kissling observed three years ago and as a Daily Kos article has detailed.  There’s also a long list of allegations posted atBishopAccountability.org.

Just ask the folks at the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests (SNAP) about how the LCWR treated them when they started asking questions.

  • To read The Motley Monk’s post at The American Catholic, click HERE.
  • To read about Robert Micken’s report, click HERE.
  • To read Frances Kissling’s article in Salon.com, click HERE.
  • To read the Daily Kos article, click HERE.
  • To read the National Catholic Reporter article about SNAP’s experience with the LCWR, click HERE.

 

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged , , , ,
24 Comments

More sorting and rediscovering

My sorting continues.

Among the small things I have rediscovered are the Cardinal Zen keychain.

More sorting and rediscovering

And then I found my long lost favorite pyx.  Very nice.

More sorting and rediscovering

They don’t make them like that anymore, I’m afraid.

I am still waiting for more offers on the Owl Lamps.  The window will be closing on these pretty soon.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
9 Comments

RECENT POSTS and THANKS

RECENT POSTS and THANKS

Car Magnets

Be sure to consult YOUR URGENT PRAYER REQUESTS.

Some posts as they scroll along.

Thanks for the donations at the end of July, dear donors.  They really helped.  I remember you again this morning during the Memento of the Living.  I would appreciate your prayers as well.

Thanks to: HE, DMx2, RB, AM, TR, WH, ER, CO’C

Also, thanks to MS for the packing stuff.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
Comments Off on RECENT POSTS and THANKS

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

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