Card. Brandmüller: Vatican II Declarations do not contain “binding doctrinal content”

From Catholic World News:

Cardinal: ‘binding doctrinal content’ not major part of breach between Holy See, SSPX

The Second Vatican Council’s declarations on non-Christian religions and religious freedom do not contain “binding doctrinal content,” Cardinal Walter Brandmüller said at a press conference on May 21. [So we should allow some real flexibility in interpreting it.]

The retired president of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, along with Archbishop Agostino Marchetto and Father Nicola Bux, is the coauthor of a newly published book, Le ‘Chiavi’ di Benedetto XVI per interpretare il Vaticano II [Benedict XVI’s ‘Keys’ for Interpreting Vatican II].

Stating that the conciliar documents have differing degrees of authority, Cardinal Brandmuller said that “there is a huge difference between a great constitution and simple declarations.”

“Strangely enough, the two most controversial documents [on religious liberty and relations with non-Christian religions] do not have a binding doctrinal content, so one can dialogue about them,” he continued. “So I don’t understand why our friends in the Society of St. Pius X concentrate almost exclusively on these two texts. And I’m sorry that they do so, because these are the two that are most easy to accept if we consider their canonical nature.” [orrrr… perhaps the easiest not to accept?]

Cardinal Brandmuller added that all the conciliar documents “must be taken seriously as expressions of the living Magisterium,” while Archbishop Marchetto said that Catholics must offer “at least an adhesion of intellect and will” to all of the documents. [A different emphasis!]

“From what I have learned, there must be an acceptance of the Council by those who want to be reunited with the Church,” said Archbishop Marchetto, the retired secretary of the Pontifical Council for Migrants and Travelers. “I don’t think the SSPX can say, ‘Well, we’ll set this or that document aside.’

Cardinal Brandmuller said that the Society of St. Pius X, like the Old Catholics after the First Vatican Council, “have in common a rejection of the legitimate developments of the doctrine and life of the Church,” but the Society is not “insignificant” like the Old Catholics. [Indeed!]

“We hope that the Holy Father’s attempt to reunify the Church succeeds,” added the cardinal, who offered a solemn pontifical Mass in the extraordinary form at St Peter’s Basilica last May.

I am wondering if the Press Office will issue a statement.

Posted in Our Catholic Identity, Religious Liberty, SSPX, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged , , ,
41 Comments

A nice Catholic school on the ropes

These are tough times for Catholic schools. I am sure you remember the travails that lead to the closing of the school in Diocese of Madison (HERE). Any number of schools are struggling.

I had an email today from someone at a pre-K-12 Catholic prep school in Lafayette, Louisiana called the John Paul the Great Academy. (I don’t want here discussion of whether or not Bl. John Paul should be called “the Great.) The school apparently used a form of the trivium et quadrivium and also has 24-hour adoration of the Blessed Sacrament.

It seems they are on the ropes right now. You might consider looking at their website.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
20 Comments

Is a major and iconic DC comic character going to come out of the closet?

To my deep irritation I found out today that Courtney Simmons senior vice-president of publicity for DC comics, told ABC News that “One of the major iconic DC characters will reveal that he is gay in a storyline in June.”

This is important because the world is divided into people who prefer DC comics characters or Marvel characters.

This is going to be a problem for characters with a strong back story. Superman has his Lois Lane, for example. And I think that stupid choice would simply irritate the whole world.

Okay, we had better have a poll:

What DC character will wind up being homosexual?

  • Robin (39%, 624 Votes)
  • Batman (13%, 208 Votes)
  • Wonder Woman (11%, 170 Votes)
  • Aquaman (10%, 155 Votes)
  • A Villain (e.g., Lex Luther) (6%, 91 Votes)
  • Flash (6%, 88 Votes)
  • Green Lantern (4%, 71 Votes)
  • Superman (3%, 54 Votes)
  • Martian Manhunter (2%, 33 Votes)
  • Other (2%, 31 Votes)
  • Booster Gold (2%, 28 Votes)
  • Cyborg (1%, 14 Votes)
  • Black Canary (1%, 13 Votes)
  • Hawkman (0%, 5 Votes)

Total Voters: 1,585

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
69 Comments

NYC: A newly ordained priest’s First Mass – Extraordinary Form Solemn Mass

I wanted to share some great liturgical eye-candy of a happy event involving some of my friends in New York City.

Fr. Patrick D’Arcy, a brand new priest for the Archdiocese of New York celebrated his First Holy Mass in the Extraordinary Form at Blessed Sacrament Church on the upper west side of Manhattan, where Msgr. Robert C. O’Connor is pastor.

There is a nice write up on the event and great photos from the Society of St. Hugh of Cluny.

The music was as follows:
Mass ordinary, Gregorian Mass VIII Missa de Angelis
Sanctus and Benedictus from the Missa Brevis of Palestrina
Communion Motet Miserere Mei by Gregorio Allegri
Recessional Motet Exsultate Justi by John Williams

A little mix of the old and new, there.

The church during the sermon, delivered by Msgr. Javier Garcia de Cardenas, of the personal prelature of Opus Dei.

I’ll just post a couple of the many photos.

Here’s a Dominus vobiscum:

And a great moment when the new priest is giving First Holy Communion to his little niece.

Just as we are going to see a lot more attacks on the Catholic Church and on faithful Catholics, we are also going to see a lot more of this sort of thing from young priests.

The hermeneutic of discontinuity and rupture is passing faster and faster as the biological solution works its inexorable way with the aging hippies and their tie-dyed ways.

WDTPRS kudos to Fr. D’Arcy.  May he have many great years as a priest.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Brick by Brick, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests, New Evangelization, Non Nobis and Te Deum, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The future and our choices |
40 Comments

Liberal Media Bias: Networks refuse to report on Catholic suits against the Obama Administration

From Newsbusters by Brent Bozell with my emphases:

The evening news broadcasts all but spiked the largest legal action in history to defend our constitutionally protected religious freedom. The May 21 editions of ABC’s World News and NBC’s Nightly News refused to report the fact that 43 Catholic dioceses and organizations filed a lawsuit on Monday against the Obama administration. CBS Evening News gave this historic news a mere 19 seconds of air time.

This is the worst bias by omission I have seen in the quarter century history of the Media Research Center. Every American knows about the Chinese communists withholding for 20 years the news that the US had landed on the moon, because it reflected poorly on the government. Our US media today are no different. They are now withholding news from the American people if it is harmful to the re-election of Barack Obama.

This is not a mistake, nor is it an editorial oversight by the broadcast networks. This is a deliberate and insidious withholding of national news to protect the ‘Chosen One’ who ABC, CBS and NBC have worked so hard to elect and are now abusing their journalistic influence to reelect Obama. And when a network like CBS mentions the suit ever-so-briefly, [NB:] they deliberately distort the issue by framing it as a contraception lawsuit instead of what they know it to be: a religious freedom issue. It’s bogus, dishonest – a flat out lie.

The fact is that the Catholic Church has unleashed legal Armageddon on the administration, promising ‘we will not comply’ with a health law that strips Catholics of their religious liberty. If this isn’t ‘news’ then there’s no such thing as news. This should be leading newscasts and the subject of special, in-depth reports. Instead, these networks are sending a clear message to all Americans that the networks will go to any lengths – even censoring from the public an event of this historic magnitude – to prevent the release of any information that will hurt Obama’s chances of re-election.

The so-called ‘news’ media have sunk to a new low. This is despicable.

 

Posted in Biased Media Coverage, Brick by Brick, Our Catholic Identity, Religious Liberty | Tagged , ,
38 Comments

Catholic Herald: Bishop urges priests to drop the Hail Mary after Prayers of the Faithful during Masses

In this week’s digital or paper, full edition of the UK’s best Catholic weekly, The Catholic Herald (subscribe) a story caught my eye.

Bishop urges priests to drop the Hail Mary from Masses

That is to say, Bp. Kieran Conry of the Diocese of Arundel and Brighton (where I have several priest friends including the great p.p. of St. Mary Magdalen) thinks that there should not be a “Haly Mary” after the prayers of the faithful or bidding prayers during Mass on the basis that the Roman Rite does not envisage the inclusion of devotional prayers like that. Also, it seems that the Holy See wrote to the Bishops of England and Wales to discourage gently the widespread practice. It isn’t widespread in the USA, however.

At my home parish in Minnesota we had either a “Hail Mary” after the intercessions or sometimes the Prayer to St. Michael. The man who formed and ran and really gave the style to the liturgical worship there was (and is, for he lives still as a nonagenarian) an Englishman, a permanent deacon to boot, who had been in the Westminster Cathderal school and was part of the army of boys who served there. He also received a charter from the Archdiocese of Westminster for the first group of the Archconfraternity of St. Stephen outside of England. The liturgical style was that of Westminster of the 1930’s. Very smooth. Precise without being too rushed, rigid or angular (which I detest). Anyway, I am sure the “Hail Mary” after the prayers of the faithful was brought in by this fine MC.

I note also in The Catholic Herald that there is an editorial on the topic and on Bp. Conry’s remarks.

“… This strikes us as sad – for what is being discouraged is a tradition that has been observed in England, known as “Mary’s dowry”, since medieval times. The absence of this venerable prayer will not enrich the Mass in any way; it will, however, distress Catholics who have been saying it at Mass every Sunday of their lives. Surely there are enough genuine liturgical abuses to address that the bishop need not worry about the persistence of this hallowed and much-loved practice.”

Let’s have a poll.

Choose your best answer and give your reasons in the combox, below. Anyone can vote but only registered participants can comment.

A "Hail Mary" (or St. Michael Prayer, etc.) after Prayers of the Faithful.

View Results

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged , , ,
100 Comments

Mary Ann Glendon explains why Bishops and Catholic institutions are suing the Federal Government

I’ve been watching the coverage of several news outlets about the Catholic lawsuits filed against the Obama Administration.  The coverage demonstrates that a lot of people misunderstand what is going on.

For example, we must NOT argue for the freedom of Catholic institutions just so that they can help the poor. It is important tto help the poor, but that is not the main argument against Pres. Obama’s attacks.  It also must not be diverted into a discussion of women’s rights or contraception.

Someone who really does understand what the bishops and Catholic institutions are doing with this lawsuit is the deeply smart Mary Ann Glendon.  She has an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal about the issue. (You may also recall that in the same year Notre Shame gave that toady doctorate to The First Gay President, Glendon declined to accept another award… to her great honor.)

My emphases and comments:

Why the Bishops Are Suing the U.S. Government

The main goal of the contraception mandate is not to protect women’s health. It is a move to conscript religious organizations into a political agenda.

By MARY ANN GLENDON

[First, and in an orderly fashion, the status quaestionis.] This week Catholic bishops are heading to federal courts across the country to defend religious liberty. On Monday they filed 12 lawsuits on behalf of a diverse group of 43 Catholic entities that are challenging the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) sterilization, abortifacient and birth-control insurance mandate.

Like most Americans, the bishops have long taken for granted the religious freedom that has enabled this nation’s diverse religions to flourish in relative harmony. But over the past year they have become increasingly concerned about the erosion of conscience protections for church-related individuals and institutions. Their top-rated program for assistance to human trafficking victims was denied funding for refusing to provide “the full range of reproductive services,” including abortion. For a time, Catholic Relief Services faced a similar threat to its international relief programs. The bishops fear religious liberty is becoming a second-class right. [When, in fact, it ought to be a “first freedom”.]

Along with leaders of other faiths who have conscientious objections to all or part of the mandate, they hoped to persuade the government to bring its regulations into line with the First Amendment, and with federal laws such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that provide exemptions to protect the conscience rights of religious institutions and individuals. [As Card. Dolan – President of the USCCB said “We have tried negotiation with the Administration and legislation with the Congress – and we’ll keep at it – but there’s still no fix. Time is running out, and our valuable ministries and fundamental rights hang in the balance, so we have to resort to the courts now.” The full statement is HERE.]

On Jan. 20, however, HHS announced it would not revise the mandate or expand its tight exemption, which covers only religious organizations that mainly hire and serve their co-religionists. Instead, the mandated coverage will continue to apply to hospitals, schools and social service providers run by groups whose religious beliefs require them to serve everyone in need.

Continued attempts to solve the problem by negotiation produced only an announcement by the Obama administration in February that insurance providers would pay for the contested services. Since many Catholic entities are self-insured and the others pay the premiums, the bishops’ concerns were not alleviated.

[NB:] The main goal of the mandate is not, as HHS claimed, to protect women’s health. It is rather a move to conscript religious organizations into a political agenda, [There it is!] forcing them to facilitate and fund services that violate their beliefs, within their own institutions. [If you are talking with people about this matter, you would not make a mistake in memorizing that explanation.]

The media[dimwits] have implied all along that the dispute is mainly of concern to a Catholic minority with peculiar views about human sexuality. But religious leaders of all faiths have been quick to see [in fact…] that what is involved is a flagrant violation of religious freedom. That’s why former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, a Baptist minister, declared, “We’re all Catholics now.” [I nearly stood up an cheered when I heard him say that on air.]

More is at stake here than the mission of all churches, including the Catholic Church, to provide social services like health care and education to everyone regardless of creed, and to do so without compromising their beliefs. [As I said at the top, this is more about defending the ability of Catholic institutions to help the poor.] At the deepest level, we are witnessing an attack on the institutions of civil society that are essential to limited government and are important buffers between the citizen and the all-powerful state. [The Obama Administration trying to aggregate all power and control over all the services these institutions to the federal government?  But this attack on the 1st Amendment goes deeper.  Read on.]

If religious providers of education, health care and social services are closed down or forced to become tools of administration policy, the government consolidates a monopoly over those essential services. As Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, put it, we are witnessing an effort to reduce religion to a private activity. “Never before,” he said, “have we faced this kind of challenge to our ability to engage in the public square as people of faith.” [Remember that Pres. Obama and his surrogates are trying to shift “freedom of religion” to “freedom of worship”.]

With this week’s lawsuits, the bishops join a growing army of other plaintiffs around the country, Catholic and non-Catholic, who are asking the courts to repel an unprecedented governmental assault on the ability of religious persons and groups to practice their religion without being forced to violate their deepest moral convictions.  [Religious convictions are logically prior to helping the poor.]

[Just as my right to free expression by swinging my fist around ends at the tip of your nose, so too…] Religious freedom is subject to necessary limitations in the interests of public health and safety. The HHS regulations do not fall into that category. The world has gotten along fine without this mandate—the services in question are widely and cheaply available, and most employers will provide coverage for them.

But if the regulations are not reversed, they threaten to demote religious liberty from its prominent place among this country’s most cherished freedoms. [Our first freedoms.] That is why Cardinal Dolan told CBS’s “Face the Nation” on April 8: “We didn’t ask for this fight, but we won’t back away from it.

Ms. Glendon is professor at Harvard Law School.

 

Posted in Biased Media Coverage, Religious Liberty, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , , , , , , , ,
16 Comments

SSPX Bp. Fellay: “Der Teufel ist los! The devil is at large!”

At Rorate I saw this. My emphases:

Rome-SSPX – Fellay speaks

The Superior General of the Society of Saint Pius X (FSSPX / SSPX), Bishop Bernard Fellay, was in Salzburg (Austria) on Thursday, in order to confirm some local faithful on the Feast of the Ascension of the Lord. At the end of the sermon, he had some words to say on current affairs:

“Sure you, my dear faithful, would like to know something about what is going on with Rome. It is a delicate matter. You know, this matter deals with our future. Therefore, it is not an easy matter. What will happen? Will we be received? Or won’t we?

“I know there are many fears. We have witnessed so many things! We fear, precisely, that things may go wrong. For the largest part, these fears are understandable. We won’t just take a step with our eyes closed. That is very, very clear. But at this moment, I cannot even tell you if it will happen, or not! Because, it isn’t clear yet. We need assurances that we can continue to do what we have been doing so far. And in this respect, some things aren’t clear yet. Simply not clear.

“And I can tell you: the devil is at large! [‘der Teufel ist los’] And, well, really everywhere. So, for us, one thing is clear: pray! We have to pray as never before. We have for our whole history been consecrated to the Mother of God, she will surely not abandon us, especially if we pray this much, and if we only want the will of God. Therefore, we will continue to pray, with trust, with trust in God. That’s it. Let us not be unsettled by our passions, by unjustified fears…

“I tell you, really, the devil is at large! And, well, everywhere. In the Fraternity itself; throughout the Church. There really are people who do not want us. Those are the Modernists, the Progressives. And they, too, cause a lot of pressure in order to stop the right thing from being done, the right thing, that is: justice. That once again we will be officially recognised as being Catholic. And that does, of course, not mean that we will all of a sudden accept that which has caused the Church so much damage. One has to understand this correctly. That is not what this is all about. The matter at hand is that we may be recognised the way we are. That we can continue Tradition, that we cannot only show Tradition to others, but also give it to them.

“At the moment I don’t have anything else but this. So, let us continue to pray, let us entrust these big, big intentions to the good God. He will not abandon us! Here we must have this hope! Whoever asks from our Lord His help will not be left alone by Him! In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.”

Benedict XVI is the Pope of Christian Unity.

You can watch the whole thing in Youtube in German:

[wp_youtube]fMHPmrvODa4#![/wp_youtube]

Posted in Pope of Christian Unity, SSPX, The future and our choices | Tagged , ,
30 Comments

About that eclipse…

Via Spaceweather comes this for your “Just Too Cool” file comes this image, which depicts a scene that is, well, just too cool.  In my native place Minnesota!

And here is the eclipse projected through leaves of a tree onto the ground.

But this… and a biretta tip to RD… is from another angle!  Over the Pacific Ocean.

Posted in Just Too Cool, Look! Up in the sky! | Tagged ,
4 Comments

QUAERITUR: How to dispose of an old sacrarium?

When there has been some mishap with the Blessed Sacrament, when perhaps liquid that was dissolved Hosts must be disposed of, when linens must be cleaned, when holy water or water blessed for Mass must be disposed of, it should go directly into the ground.  That is why ever sacristy should have a sacrarium, a kind of sink with its pipe going into the earth rather than into a sewer.  The sacrarium is useful and necessary for the disposal of some sacred things in the proper way.

But when the instrument of disposal, the sacrarium, needs disposing of, what to do?

From a reader:

Are there rubrics (if that is the correct terminology) for disposing of sacraria? A friend of mine is worried that his parish sacrarium may be inappropriately removed (alas, that it is being removed!). He thinks the parish may be throwing away the piping for it. Is there some way the pipe should be handled? Also, and somewhat related, is it acceptable to dispose of the water — used to soak the corporals and purificators — into bushes or plants on church grounds when there is no sacrarium? 

Good question.  Yes, the water for linens and so forth can be poured into the ground in some decent place.  The flower beds would be a pretty good choice.

In most American or modern sacristies the sacrarium could look like a regular sink, but it will usually have a cover of some kind, one that closes completely or one that is like a grate.  It could be next to the regular work sink or it could be freestanding or attached separately on the wall.   Variations abound.  It is, however, usually be marked, with a Cross or with the word “Sacrarium” itself.  It might even have a lock.  This would be because sometimes Hosts must be completely dissolved, and that takes time.  You would put them in, say, an covered ablusion cup, and then leave it sitting in the sacrarium, which you could lock, until it was time to pour the liquid down.

I am unaware of any directive about the disposal of a sacrarium. At first glance, it is reasonable that if we take care to disposed of books used for worship properly or dispose of vestments and vessels, then the sacrarium and its parts should be shown a measure of respect.  Surely this matter has come up before, somewhere, because churches are being torn down and/or rebuilt, sacristies are being redone all the time.

If the sacrarium and the pipes could not be recycled in some way so that it could continue their use as a sacrarium – because every sacristy needs one! – then I suppose they could be buried, perhaps in the foundation of a new church structure. I am reminded of the solution one diocese had for its old, now obsolete liturgical books. They placed them in space in the floor of a sanctuary being rebuilt.

Furthermore, it might not actually be possible in a reasonable and practical way to get at the pipe for the sacrarium, other than the part that is close to the basin and drain itself.  In that case, there is nothing to do.

I think the basic principle to protect is that we should treat those things which are intended for sacred uses with respect and not just toss them into the garbage as if they were nothing.

Anyone?

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