Fishwrap’s advocacy of dissent continues in a chat with Sr. Theresa Kane

The National Catholic Fishwrap, pipe for the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR – a subsidiary of the Magisterium of Nuns) continues lapdog-like in its tail-wagging support of dissident women religious.  A case in point:

Former LCWR leader gives take on Vatican order

Among those still trying to understand the implications of the Vatican order as the LCWR board meets this week is Mercy Sr. Theresa Kane.

A former LCWR leader, Kane made headlines across the world when she welcomed Pope John Paul II to the United States in 1979 and pointedly asked [interesting verb choice] him about the possibility of ordaining women to the priesthood. [What a gal!]

Kane, now an associate professor at Mercy College in Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., first spoke to NCR about the Vatican order in a wide-ranging, half-hour-long phone conversation in early May.
Among her reflections then were her initial thoughts on hearing news of the Vatican’s move, how she sees it fitting into the larger history between the Vatican and U.S. women religious, and what advice she has for the current LCWR leadership.
Following is that conversation, edited for clarity and length.

[…]

At this point, what do you think about the idea of LCWR letting go of its canonical recognition and just becoming a voluntary organization?

I think there’s some wisdom to looking at the question. The reason I would be uncomfortable with the direction is it’s like giving up the power that we have.  And I don’t really want to do that. [Not when your goal is power, no.  Besides, disbanding and reforming without the approval of the Holy See would make you irrelevant.] I don’t think we have a reason to not be pontifical, to not be officially and canonically Catholic.  [I don’t think we have a reason not to be… hmmm.]
But at the same time, if we were to really do a discernment on this to decide if it’s more harmful to continue as a pontifical organization or not, we may say it is — that it’s taking too much energy, its taking too much time, or we’re misdirecting our energies from the service of people. [That’s one way to justify it.]
I wouldn’t not want to look at it, but I don’t find myself saying that should be our position because I think there are forces in the Vatican and the hierarchy that would be happy if we did it. I really do. [And I think you are deluded.  They would much rather have such a group functioning well and properly. But that is NOT what the state of the question reveals in the case of the LCWR.]

It’s almost like you’re saying that if you go noncanonical, you remove yourself as the thorn in the Vatican’s side.

That’s correct. That’s absolutely right. And I think that we do give up the power that we’ve had.
I’ve been in LCWR since 1970. So I’m in the organization 40 years. I’m not sure that I want it to go that quickly. I really don’t. They actually could have taken it away if they wanted to. After five years, that may be part of their plan. But who knows? [blah blah blah] Between now and then there’s much of divine intervention and divine providence that can come along.

As Sister continues to struggle to understand what is going on and to remain relevant, let me remind you of the paragraph we had about her in the post Nuns Gone Wild: A Trip Down Memory Lane:

Theresa Kane: as president of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR) in 1979, she greeted Pope John Paul II at the National Shrine in Washington, D.C. In her address she urged him to open all ministries of Church life to women. Her remarks made headlines around the world. Shortly after her address, she stated that “as a result of the greeting, a few congregations withdrew from the conference. Through that experience LCWR became more public; the membership gained new responsibilities.”  Today she supports women in deciding to undergo fake ordinations of women in the Catholic Church as if they were real. “The Roman Catholic women priesthood is small, highly criticized, and not going away,” she went on. “No one controls our future but ourselves.”

Ain’t she a peach?

Posted in Magisterium of Nuns, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , ,
24 Comments

Spirit in the City

One of the interesting things I have learned about here in London has to do with an “annual Catholic faith festival in the West End” called Spirit in the City.

At four parishes in the West end, on different evenings there are to be talks, Eucharistic adoration, and processions.

The events occur from 7-9 June.

Sounds like a good idea for busy urban centers where there is a lot of evening activity.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Brick by Brick, New Evangelization, On the road, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged ,
2 Comments

The future and our choices

I posted this before (HERE) but it is worth a review:

I continue to marvel that this from Catholic News Service.

Posted in Benedict XVI, Linking Back, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The future and our choices | Tagged , , ,
6 Comments

BENEDICT XVI’S PRAYER INTENTIONS FOR JUNE

BENEDICT XVI’S PRAYER INTENTIONS FOR JUNE

Vatican City, 31 may (VIS).- Pope Benedict’s general prayer intention for June is: “That believers may recognize in the Eucharist the living presence of the Risen One who accompanies them in daily life”.

His missionary intention is: “That Christians in Europe may rediscover their true identity and participate with greater enthusiasm in the proclamation of and participate with more enthusiasm in the Gospel”.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
1 Comment

The flight summary

The flight passed without an inordinate number of alarming incidents.

I am glad to report that Delta has updated their video system, though I wonder if their choices of Snakes On A Plane, Airport, Castaway, Con Air, Passenger 57, and Air Force One were the very best.

I was able to shut out most of the screams and other flight noise by putting two audio feeds, using a two-male-to-one-female jack (which sounds like something Pres. Obama will soon evolve into promoting) into my noise eliminating Bose headset. Thus, I enjoyed simultaneously a loop of relaxing arias from Beijing Opera and an audiobook (not in a loop) of Quantum: Einstein, Bohr and the great debate about the nature of reality.

Meanwhile, I jotted some notes on a talk I’ll be giving.

Update:

I am settled in and am out and about. My first errands are accomplished, my tech is functioning properly, and all that is lacking is a pint.

Hopefully I’ll meet up with a friend and blog reader later.

My London friends have, I think, my number.

Perhaps a London blognic is in order?

20120531-171039.jpg

Posted in On the road | Tagged ,
26 Comments

Fulfilling Mass Obligation at SSPX chapels: Has there been a reversal?




I am just getting up to speed on this, since I am on the road.

Someone submitted a question to the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” about whether or not we fulfilled our obligation on days of precept (i.e., Sundays, Holy Days of  Obligation), by attending Holy Mass at a chapel of the Society of St. Pius X.  The position of the Holy See hitherto has always been ‘Yes’.

Some asked, and here is the transcript of the letter found at Queen of Martyrs Press:

And let this be a lesson to people who ask question!

February 19, 2012

His Eminence
William Joseph Card. Levada
President of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”
Palazzo del Sant’Uffizio
00120 Vatican City

Most Reverend Eminence,

My name is ___________ and I reside in ______,______, U.S.A. I am writing to Your Eminence in regards to a “Friends of the Society of St. Pius X” chapel  [QUAERITUR: Is that chapel different from ordinary chapels of the SSPX?  What is a “Friends of the SSPX” chapel?] here in ________ called __________ Roman Catholic Church whose chaplain is Rev.____________.

In Pope Benedict XVI’s letter on March 10, 2009 concerning the lifting of the excommunications of the bishops of the Society of St. Pius X, the Holy Father conveyed that the priests of the Society do not exercise their ministry legitimately within the Church. I do not wish to question the legitimacy of the ministry of the clergy of Society of St. Pius X and that of their affiliates, as this has already been addressed by His Holiness.

My questions strictly pertain to Canon 1248 § 1 of the Code of Canon Law, which states:

The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.

Based on this information, I have two very specific questions which I would like to ask Your Eminence to answer:

1) Strictly considering the aforementioned canon, would a Catholic fulfill his Mass obligation by assisting at Holy Mass by attending this “Friends of the Society of St. Pius X” chapel called __________ Roman Catholic Church in _______,_______?

2) Upon the condition that the answer to the first question is in the negative, does a Catholic sin by assisting at Holy Mass at the aforementioned “Friends of the Society of St. Pius X” chapel?

Please understand that I am neither asking nor expecting Your Eminence to recommend that the faithful attend liturgical services at this or any other chapel affiliated with the Society of St. Pius X.

I wish to thank Your Eminence for taking the time to address this matter for me and answering these two questions. I trust that after receiving Your Eminence’s response that I will have clear and direct answers to each of these two questions that will avoid any further confusion. I can assure Your Eminence of my prayers.

Embracing the sacred purple of His Most Reverend Eminence, I am His Eminence’s very humble and obedient servant.

Sincerely,

Okay… that lays it out clearly.

Here is the scan of the letter of response from the Secretary of the PCED, Msgr. Pozzo.  Remember, all correspondence to a dicastery of the Holy See is to be addressed to the head of the dicastery.  The appropriate person responds:

Again, I don’t know if a “Friends of the SSPX” chapel is different from a normal SSPX chapel.  Perhaps therein lies the difference.  Otherwise, if this is to be applied to the SSPX as a whole, all chapels associated with the SSPX, then what this letter conveys seems to be a reversal of the previous position of the Holy See.

One can only surmise that such a change has been advanced in order to clarify the status of those of the SSPX who would NOT choose closer and clear unity with Peter in the person of the Roman Pontiff.  If there is a reconciliation under the leadership of SSPX Bp. Fellay, and if a group refuses to go along, then – before the fact, and that is important – that splinter group would know where they stand spiritually.

Here is something to consider.

People can now say “But Father! But Father!  How can the Holy See say one thing before and another thing now?”

The Church gets to determine how we fulfill our obligations.  The Church gets to interpret law.  It is a long-standing principle of interpretation of law to be as generous and flexible with them when they impose obligations (as the law does in regard to days of precept).  In that case, this letter puzzles me a little, though the official interpretation of law is far above my pay grade.

I suspect that we will get some clarifications in the near future.

Meanwhile,

DO NOT FREAK OUT.

Benedict XVI is the Pope of Christian Unity,

UPDATE 1 June 0429 GMT:

From Rorate:

Clarification (2100 GMT): Following our request for a clarification, we have been informed by the US District of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) that the chapel mentioned in the letter below is not a chapel of the Society and that, while its specific name was expressly mentioned by the sender in the deleted data, it is NOT included in the public list of chapels, including those other chapels identified by the Society publicly as ‘Friends of the Society of St. Pius X’. It is very possible that this information, easily researched online on the website of the U. S. District, might have led someone in the Commission to believe that this specific chapel, which is not listed by them and not one of the “Friends of the Society of Saint Pius X” or “other traditional (non-SSPX) venues”, is a venue with no affiliation whatsoever with the SSPX and led to this different appraisal by the Commission.

That helps.

In any event, I stand by what I wrote, above.  This should be food for thought for those who would not accept greater and clearer unity with the Roman Pontiff.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, Pope of Christian Unity, SSPX, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The Drill | Tagged , ,
84 Comments

What a view!

My view for a few hours and it has already been a long day.

20120530-210437.jpg

Posted in On the road |
11 Comments

Ecce vide, pulchra sumus

In rooting around in my things while writing an article for the paper, I found a great quote of Augustine.

For Augustine all created things in the universe, even inanimate things, both give witness to God and give Him glory.

Respondent tibi omnia: Ecce vide, pulchra sumus. Pulchritudo eorum confessio eorum.

All things respond to you, O God: ‘Behold! See! We are beautiful!’ Their beauty is their profession.”(s. 241, 2)

This last part needs some teasing out. That confessio is a complicated word. We might do this as “their hymn of praise, their demonstration that you are God, their admission that they are not”.

There’s a little theology of the environment for you!

How about your own spiritual environment?

Are you beautiful at Mass?

Go to confession.

Posted in GO TO CONFESSION, Patristiblogging | Tagged , , ,
3 Comments

An Ember Day reminder

Our friends at Rorate have a good post reminding us that today, which on my planet is Wednesday in the Octave of Pentecost, is also an Ember Day.

More on Ember Days, HERE.

Traditionally, these Ember Days were times for ordinations.  Therefore, I very much like the last line in the Rorate blog entry:

[T]he purpose of the Ember Days outweighs everything else:  priests.  This week, during the Ember Days, we pray for many more.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, The future and our choices | Tagged , ,
3 Comments

USCCB website:

I just found this on the site of the USCCB:

Catholics Care.  Catholics Vote.

I won’t explain it because I want to manipulate you into going there to see what it is.

o{];¬)

 

Posted in Brick by Brick, Emanations from Penumbras, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Religious Liberty, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , ,
16 Comments