“Darmok and Jalad at Tanagra! Sebelius and JFK at Georgetown!

Do you remember Archbp. Charles Chaput’s great talk in Texas about then candidate John F. Kennedy’s infamous speech in which he sold out his Catholic identity for the sake of life in the public square? Do you remember that then-candidate Rick Santorum took flack for criticizing JFK’s speech?

Ah… the Kennedy’s.

You know of course that to its eternal shame the Jesuit-run Georgetown University was invited to speak even though she is the architect of Pres. Obama’s attack on the 1st Amendment and on the Catholic Church through the “HHS mandate”.

Read this to sharpen your already honed sense of irony.

SEBELIUS INVOKES JFK

May 18, 2012

Catholic League president Bill Donohue comments on Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius’ address at Georgetown University today:

Kathleen Sebelius quoted selectively from John F. Kennedy’s 1960 address to the Greater Houston Ministerial Association. She said she shares Kennedy’s vision of America “where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials—and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against us all.”

This was obviously meant as a shot at those bad bishops who allegedly want to impose their will on the public.

In that same speech, however, Kennedy said, “I would not look with favor upon a President working to subvert the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty.”

Perhaps someone can gently explain to Sebelius why this shows JFK’s astonishing prescience.

Contact our director of communications about Donohue’s remarks:
Jeff Field
Phone: 212-371-3191
E-mail: cl@catholicleague.org

Can. 915!

CLICK TO GO TO STORE

PS: I always thought that the episode I cited at the top was one of the dumbest moments of the series.

Posted in 1983 CIC can. 915, Dogs and Fleas, Religious Liberty | Tagged , , , , , , , ,
32 Comments

QUAERITUR: Can I take Communion home for my sick wife?

From a reader:

Am I allowed to take home communion for my sick wife & in what.

You are to be commended for wanting to help your wife benefit from the Eucharist.  I hope she is better soon.

The short answer is, No, you can’t take a Host home for your sick wife…. not on your own.

Please get in touch with your parish’s office and arrange for Holy Communion to be brought, if not by the priest or a deacon, then perhaps by some lay person who has been given an official deputation to do so, and with the proper sort of container.

The very best option is to have a home visit from the priest, who can also hear a confession if necessary.

In any event, no one can simply take the Eucharist, a consecrated Host, home. That would be Very Wrong. Not just Wrong, but Very Wrong.

Also, if your wife has a very serious condition, you should let the parish priest know so that, if necessary, he can give her the Sacrament of Anointing.  Only bishops and priests can confer that sacrament, not deacons or lay people.

Thanks for asking instead of just doing it.

 

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

MINNESOTA READERS – WDTPRS POLL

I have something important to say to fellow Minnesotans.

But first, I want to find out how many of you readers actually are Minnesotans.

A quick poll.

Minnesota!

View Results

Posted in SESSIUNCULA | Tagged
37 Comments

20 May Eclipse of the Sun – Visible in North America

Once upon a time, back in the late 70’s, a friend and I drove north in the dead, and I mean dead of winter, wayyyy north of Winnipeg, so that we could see a total eclipse of the Sun.  We parked in a place that so flat and featureless that it seemed concave, the horizon visible 360°.  We listened on shortwave radio to track the penumbra and umbra… totality.

When it came, we could see the shadow of the moon rushing towards us across the flat, white face of the Earth.

On 20 May there will be visible in the USA an annular, not total, eclipse.  You might make some plans to see it if you are in the area of best viewing, or even if it is an area of partial viewing.  You and your children might wind up with a great memory!

[wp_youtube]ENDZtWH0IRg[/wp_youtube]

Also, think about reading Michael O’Brien’s Father Elijah (UK HERE), followed – in this order – by Strangers and Sojourners, Plague Journal and then Eclipse of the Sun.

I think they describe, as many of O’Brien’s books do, the spiritual war being waged in our time.

Posted in SESSIUNCULA |
17 Comments

The “First Gay President”, orientation, and military chaplains

A reader sent me a link to a story on Gateway Pundit about the latest moves in what I am convinced is an effort to drive sound military chaplains out of military service.

Obama Continues His Assault on Christians: Will Force Military Chaplains to Marry Gays
Posted by Jim Hoft on Wednesday, May 16, 2012

The first gay president will force military chaplains to perform same sex marriages or face repercussions. This follows the administration’s very public assault on the Catholic Church earlier this year with their mandate that forces religious organizations to pay for employees’ birth control.

Barack Obama will force military chaplains to marry gays.
CNS News reported:

The Obama administration “strongly objects” to provisions in a House defense authorization bill that would prohibit the use of military property for same-sex “marriage or marriage-like” ceremonies, and protect military chaplains from negative repercussions for refusing to perform ceremonies that conflict with their beliefs, according to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

In a policy statement released Wednesday, the OMB outlined numerous objections to aspects of the fiscal year 2013 National Defense Authorization Bill (H.R. 4310). The bill was reported out of the House Armed Services Committee last week and is set to be debated in the House, beginning Wednesday

Overall, it recommends that President Obama veto H.R. 4310 if its cumulative effects “impede the ability of the Administration to execute the new defense strategy and to properly direct scarce resources.”

The veto warning is not specifically linked to the two provisions dealing with marriage, but they are listed among parts of the bill which the administration finds objectionable.

The photo with the story is interesting. I am not quite sure what this is, but take note of the orientation of their collective prayer.

I think this may be a protestant communion service of some kind.

They seem not to have a problem with ad orientem prayer.

In the meantime, I note that Fishwrap has not yet said anything about the Obama Administration, Nancy Pelosi, the the inevitable pressure that Catholic chaplains will experience.

Posted in Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,
30 Comments

Ain’t it da truth’

A friend sent this to me.

20120518-065907.jpg
This one actually extracted from the undersigned a sharp bark of laughter!

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged , ,
20 Comments

Pelosi: No to Provision Protecting Chaplains From Being Ordered to Act Against Faith

I am on the road so I’ll just post this and walk away in disgust.

Pelosi: No to Provision Protecting Chaplains From Being Ordered to Act Against Faith: ‘It’s A Fraud’
By Elizabeth Harrington
May 17, 2012

(CNSNews.com) – House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she stands with the White House in opposing a provision in the House defense authorization bill that would prohibit anyone in the military from ordering a chaplain to act against his or her “conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs” or against the religious beliefs of the denomination to which he or she belongs.

Pelosi described the conscience-protection provision as a “fraud.”

[…]

On Tuesday, the White House issued a statement saying that the administration “strongly opposes” the provision in the defense authorization protecting the conscience of chaplains–Section 536–as well as another provision in the bill–Section 537–that says military facilities cannot be used to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies.

“The Administration strongly objects to sections 536 and 537 because those provisions adopt unnecessary and ill-advised policies that would inhibit the ability of same-sex couples to marry or enter a recognized relationship under State law,” said the White House statement.

“Section 536 would prohibit all personnel-related actions based on certain religious and moral beliefs, which, in its overbroad terms, is potentially harmful to good order and discipline,” said the White House.

“Section 537 would obligate DOD to deny Service members, retirees, and their family members access to facilities for religious ceremonies on the basis of sexual orientation, a troublesome and potentially unconstitutional limitation on religious liberty,” the White House.

Section 536 of the bill, introduced by Rep. Todd Akin (R-Mo.), states in part that no member of the armed forces may “direct, order, or require a chaplain to perform any duty, rite, ritual, ceremony, service, or function that is contrary to the conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of the chaplain, or contrary to the moral principles and religious beliefs of the endorsing faith group of the chaplain.”

Section 537 prohibits the use of military property for the performing of any “marriage or marriage-like ceremony involving anything other than the union of one man with one woman.”

The House Armed Services Committee passed H.R. 4310 on May 9 by a 56-5 bipartisan vote. Amendments 536 and 537 passed in committee earlier that day by a margin of 36-25 and 37-24, respectively.

On May 9, 2011, the Office of the Chief of Navy Chaplains advised that same-sex couples in the Navy would be able to get married in Navy chapels, and that Navy chaplains would be allowed to perform the ceremonies. The Chaplain Corps revised their Tier I training manuals, which had previously indicated that same-sex marriages were not authorized on federal property.

That change gave chaplains permission to marry homosexual couples, but did not force them to perform ceremonies.

Posted in Dogs and Fleas, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, Religious Liberty, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , , ,
72 Comments

WDTPRS Ascension (1962MR): cracks into a greater way, a bigger way of living

I  was struck today by the beauty of the Communion rite today, the Communion Antiphone and the Post Communion prayer in older, traditional form of Holy Mass today, for the Feast of the Ascension… which falls 40 days after Easter.  The Mass texts from the Feast of the Ascension can be used for the feria days that follow.

There is a pattern repeated during Mass. There is a procession, a greeting and a prayer.  Think, Introit chant- Dominus vobiscum – Oremus….  The same occurs at the Offertory and then Communion, the chant accompanies the procession to receive and, after Communion, there is the greeting and then the prayer.  The chant and the oration tie together, and at the core of the knot is the greeting and response.

So… first we hear the Communion Antiphon (in chant notation below).  Then, the

POSTCOMMUNION:

Praesta nobis, quaesumus,
omnipotens et misericors Deus:
ut, quae visibilibus mysteriis sumenda percepimus,
invisibili consequamur effectu
.

That word mysterium in Latin prayers is laden with significance.  It is the Latin rendering of Greek mysterion and is virtually interchangable with sacramentum, another Latin word used to render Greek mysterion.

This prayer is found in many ancient manuscripts.  In the Liber sacramentorum Gellonensis it is found at the entry CXLI. ITE IN ASCENSA DNI. AD SCM PETRUM… that is, for the Feast of the Ascension celebrated at St. Peter’s Basilica.

LITERAL VERSION:
Grant us, we implore,
almighty and merciful God:
that we may obtain by an invisible effect
that which we grasped by means of visible sacramental mysteries
.

The sacraments, especially Communion of the Most Holy Eucharist, are gateways, paths, even cracks into a greater way, a bigger way of living.

Moses, having encountered God in the burning bush and having learned his ineffable Name, later wants to see God.  He asks God to show Himself to him.  God instructs Moses to stand behind a rock with a cleft in in and then glimpse God as God passes before the rock with His back turned. This is what happens with us during Holy Mass and Holy Communion. We get a glimpse at the vast reality beyond, a reality was cannot grasp here and now.  Only in the time to come will we grasp it.

That percipio means “take possession of” or “seize”, but also “to perceive, understand”, “to obtain”.  There is a juxtaposition of “grasping” in the prayer found in consequor and percipio.  Consequor can be “reach, attain, obtain” but also “follow a model”.  In our conformity to the thing we consume at Holy Communion we have the possibility of grasping that which it signifies.  Sacraments, mysteries, are signs which symbolize and confer that which cannot be perceived, grasped, in the senses.  They are visible signs that confer grace.

We must learn in our worship to peer not only at the signs themselves, but also through the cracks and spaces between the signs, which permit us a glimpse of MYSTERY.

Let us turn to the East in our worship, toward the One who returns though He has never left us alone.

Moreover, that Communion Antiphon (above) has an interesting musical element linking it to the 4th Sunday of Advent’s Ecce virgo.  There is an ascent in the melody: re-mi-fa-sol-la on the accented syllables of the words “Orientem” in the Ascension chant and, respectively, “Emmanuel” in in the Advent chant. This particular figure occurs only in these two chants.  The Advent chant (just before Christmas) refers to Christ’s First Coming and the Ascension (just before Pentecost) referring to his Second Coming.   Both involve an ascent and a descent, an emptying and a filling, a going forth and a return, an exitus and a reditus.  The Son leaves the Father us so He can return with us.  Christ leaves us so that He can return.  These chants are like bookends in the liturgical seasons.

Also, in the chant today we sing or say: “Psállite Dómino, qui ascéndit super coelos coelórum ad Oriéntem, allelúia. … Sing to the Lord, who ascended above the heavens to the East.”  Today’s chant reminds us that the best and proper “orientation” of our liturgical worship is toward the liturgical EAST, whence Christ will come again.

It is as if the liturgical East is the crack in Moses’ rock through which we peer at mystery.

Posted in WDTPRS |
8 Comments

QUAERITUR: “You are absolved of your sins” instead of “I absolve you”.

From a reader:

My confessor said: “you are absolved of your sins” instead of “I absolve you of your sins.” I searched the web and your blog and found nothing similar to this example. Confession still valid or do I re-confess? Thanks!

Yet another priest lacks the wits simply to say the formula of absolution as the Church has prescribed.

How long, O Lord?

What really burns me about this is that that priest left you in doubt about your state.  I think that is one of the cruelest things a priest can do: leave someone in doubt about the validity of a sacrament.

Let us stipulate that priests are busy guys. Some things they do, however, are more important than others.  Priests are not ordained for organizing canned goods drives, going to a shut-in outreach committee meeting, or talking to the contractor about tuck-pointing. Yes, those things are important, but in a lesser sphere of importance.  The priest is ordained to say Mass and forgive sins.  Anyone can do the other things.  Only priests can say Mass and forgive sins.  So, when called upon to do the two things they are indispensible for, perhaps priests ought to try to get them right.  No?  Am I wrong?

Honestly, what’s with these guys? If they can’t get such a simple thing as this right, then maybe they shouldn’t permitted to drive a car or use a credit card.

I will preface this with I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the words of absolution Father Chucklehead said are of doubtful validity.

His statement was a declaration of an existing condition rather than an actual act of absolving.  It is the act of absolving by which he and Christ absolve.

Of course we can argue that in the Gospels Christ Himself in Luke 5 says “Man, your sins are forgiven you.” (RSV) But that is the Lord.  Instead, Father Chucklehead acts in persona Christi as he administers the sacrament.  Father Chucklehead, not being the Lord Himself, is bound to do so as the Church determines.  Christ gave His power and authority to the Church to determine how the sacraments He instituted were to be celebrated and administered. Holy Church has determined that the formula for absolution, spoken by the priest, is “X” and not “Y”.  What he said is related to the content of the form of absolution, but it wasn’t the actual act of absolving as the Latin Church has determined it to be.

Because we like to be Unreconstructed Ossified Manualists from time to time, we also check the old reliable manuals of theology. In Ott, for example, we reaffirm our memory that the Council of Trent clarified that the absolution of sins doesn’t merely indicate the forgiveness of sins, but it also effects it.  The formula is not supposed to be declaratory, as if it is a confirmation of the penitent’s contrition which brought about justification.  The form of the sacrament signifies the sacramental effect, that is, the removal of the guilt of the sins.  In other words, absolution absolves.  Absolution doesn’t just describe that you were absolved.

We also know from our manuals that the essential words in the formula are “Ego te absolvo a peccatis tuis“.  Some authors suggest that “tuis” could be omitted, because the “te” is there.  The other words of the formula can be omitted for a good reason though, in any event, the omission doesn’t invalidate the absolution.  What Father Chucklehead did was change the essential words in such a way that they produced a different concept, they produced a declaratory concept, rather than an actual act of absolution.

Let us leave aside the point that the words can be changed, validly, for the sake of absolving more than one person in an emergency (which the Church permits and provides for).

So, ut brevis, if I were in your shoes (and keep in mind that at hearing the odd words I would insist that the confessor say them properly and even say “Repeat after me…” even if I had to reach through the screen and twist the stole around his neck … but a layman should never be so temerarious as to do something that aggressive… ehvvv-errrr… ), I would at your earliest convenience go to confession.  Begin your confession with the brief statement that the last guy changed the words of absolution to such a degree that you were left in a doubt about the absolution.  Then confess what you have to confess.  The statement up front should let the priest know that he shouldn’t play fast and loose with the formula.  Hopefully, even if he is some ad libbing lib, the three brains cells left to him will conspire to make him read the proper form from a card if necessary.

The combox is closed.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, GO TO CONFESSION, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged , , , ,
Comments Off on QUAERITUR: “You are absolved of your sins” instead of “I absolve you”.

More with Morse Code – cool app

I have lately posted some items about Morse Code.  One of you readers sent me a video, dated from the beginning of April, of a very cool alternative to those nasty and inconvenient touch screens on our iPhones.

Enjoy!

[wp_youtube]1KhZKNZO8mQ[/wp_youtube]

You know, some people send and hear Morse Code at speeds of even 40 words per minute.  This could be a good option!

Posted in Ham Radio, Lighter fare | Tagged , ,
11 Comments