QUAERITUR: 2 male or 2 female sponsors for Confirmation

From a reader:

I attended a Confirmation yesterday, and I noticed two things that made me doubtful. Firstly, the fact that some of the girls being confirmed had two godfathers, or two godmothers, while I had been told in my own Confirmation I could have either one, or one of each gender, and they couldn’t be my parents. Would you clarify this point?

Thank you for you time, and pardon my english, it isn’t my first language!

Can. 892 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law simply speaks of one sponsor for confirmation and states that the sponsor must fulfill the conditions mentioned for godparents in can. 874.

While having more than one sponsor for confirmation is not forbidden by law, it is not foreseen.  Therefore, it could be a legitimate “praeter legem” custom that has been developed, or is in the process of developing.

Since only one sponsor is required, canon law makes no provision for a second sponsor being of the opposite sex of the first sponsor.

However, it seems a good idea to permit this in an age where the complementarity of men and women is under attack!  It sends a wrong signal to forbid “same sex godparents” at baptism, but to allow same sex sponsors at confirmation.  Still, there is no law forbidding it. We cannot place burdens on the faithful that the law does not impose.

That said, we must admit that all sorts of silly things are legal!

 

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

CDWDS Confirms Rite for the Blessing of a Child in the Womb

I read in the monthly newsletter of the USCCB’s Committee on Divine Worship (Vol. 48, April 2012) the following:

CDWDS Confirms Rite for the Blessing of a Child in the Womb

The text of the Rite for the Blessing of a Child in the Womb, approved in English and Spanish by the USCCB in November 2008, has been confirmed by the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments; the English text was confirmed on December 8, 2011 (Prot. n. 1422/08/L), and the Spanish text followed on March 1, 2012 (Prot. n. 125/12/L). Timothy Cardinal Dolan, USCCB President, authorized its use in the liturgy as of March 26, 2012, the Solemnity of the Annunciation of the Lord.

This new blessing was originally developed in March 2008 by the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities for inclusion in the Book of Blessings and Bendicional, and further refined by the Committee on Divine Worship and the body of Bishops. The introduction to the rite observes that the blessing of an unborn child “sustains the parents by imparting grace and comfort in time of concern and need, unites the parish in prayer for the unborn child, and fosters respect for human life within society.”

Within Mass, the blessing of a child in the womb takes place after the Prayer of the Faithful; an additional solemn blessing at the end of Mass is also provided, drawn from number 272 of the Book of Blessings. The blessing may also take place within a celebration of the Word of God, celebrated by a priest or deacon either in a church or at another suitable location (such as a hospital, the home of the parents, etc.).

In sending the recognitio for the Rite for the Blessing of a Child in the Womb, the Congregation also offered the following suggestion: “Supplementary materials for the faithful based on the themes of the ritual or even the text itself, such as a prayer card that could be prayed privately by an expectant mother, could certainly be created and distributed.” While there are no immediate plans to create such resources at a national level, diocesan efforts or even local efforts at the parish level could be undertaken at any time.

The text of the new Rite for the Blessing of a Child in the Womb/Rito de bendición de una criatura en el vientre materno will be made available on the USCCB website during the week before Mother’s Day (May 13, 2012), with a printed booklet to follow, published by USCCB Communications. (The two U.S. publishers of the Book of Blessings, Catholic Book Publishing Corp. and Liturgical Press, are also expected to publish editions of the rite.)

For the benefit of our readers, the English and Spanish texts of the Prayer of Blessing, as taken from the new rite, are reprinted on the next page.

[…]

I made an image of the texts:

.

Posted in Emanations from Penumbras, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 | Tagged , ,
14 Comments

QUAERITUR: Can a Protestant minister officiate at Catholic marriage while the priest watches?

From a reader:

First, please know you are in my prayers. My question: Is it permissible for a Protestant minister to officiate the Marriage Rite at a Catholic Nuptial Mass? This is about to take place at our local parish and our pastor stated that as long as he witnesses (watches) the vows, it is okay.

It would not be possible for a non-Catholic minister to receive the vows of a couple at a Catholic nuptial Mass.

Depending on the diocesan laws and customs, and subject to the norms of the 1993 Ecumenical Directory, there might be some place for the non-Catholic minister in the nuptial Mass – processing in, sitting in the sanctuary, even standing (silently) with the Catholic priest while he, the priest, receives the vows of both parties, offering congratulations to the couple on behalf of his ecclesial community at the end of the nuptial Mass.

If the Protestant minister “officiates” at the marriage rite while the Catholic priest merely “witnesses” the vows being exchanged, we have a likely case of the marriage being null due to a defect of canonical form.

The priest (or deacon) must ask the questions (“Do you, Sempronius, take this woman, Caia…”) of BOTH parties.

If the priest (deacon) does not, then the canonical form to which the Catholic party is bound is defective.

If the priest obtained a dispensation from form for the couple, the dispensation should specify where the wedding should take place (e.g., not in a Catholic Church) and who should officiate.

In the interest of protecting the couple from an invalid marriage, it could be prudent to report this matter to the local diocesan tribunal or chancery.

If the wedding has already taken place, it might be possible to sanate it. If it has not, the pastor might be able to be corrected.

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

Pres. Obama undermining free-speech.

Pres. Obama is undermining not just the freedom of religion clause of the 1st Amendment but also free-speech.

Under a new law which Obama signed anyone protected by the Secret Service may request that there be no protests near them.  The penalty is a felony.

Consider that Pres. Obama can give Secret Service protection to anyone.

Therefore, you could be arrested by the Secret Service at their discretion or at the request of the protectee and then jailed with a felony charge for protesting anywhere near that person.

[wp_youtube]7SGWH3kirzg[/wp_youtube]

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Dogs and Fleas, TEOTWAWKI, The Drill, The future and our choices, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged , , ,
25 Comments

An examination of themes of keynote speeches delivered at LCWR Assemblies

At the blog Domine, Da Mihi Hanc Aquam there is a reposted summary of themes which emerged from the writer’s close reading keynote speeches presented at the annual assemblies of the Leadership Conference of Women Religious (LCWR – a subsidiary of the Magisterium of Nuns).

Some large excerpts, but you should read the whole thing there:

I read through several of the keynote speeches, and I noticed a couple of themes (that’s what we Old Lit Teachers do–look for themes). Here’s just a few in no particular order:

1. “Mission”: all of the addresses I read (four of them) exhort the sisters to mission. But never the mission of the Church that we would recognize as evangelization, that is, the preaching and teaching of the gospel that Christ gave to the apostles. The mission the sisters are exhorted to take up is always, always some form of left-liberal social engineering disguised as caring for Earth or insuring access to adequate health [care] for women. […]

2). Insularity: despite the exhortations to “mission,” all of the addresses I read include broad descriptions of the history of women religious as a way of “situating” the experience of these women within their own “mission,” in other words, they spend a lot of page space on talking to one another about one another’s grand innovations after the VC2 and how these innovations are radically different from anything that’s come before […]

3). “Prophetic”: as a corollary to their mission and insularity, the addresses harp on how “prophetic” women religious are in these innovations. As far as I can tell, “prophetic” means whatever they want it to mean. It clearly does not mean what the Church means by the term. If the examples used are typical, “prophetic” means something like “doing what we please and then accusing the Church of being too traditional, oppressive, and isolated from the world for not following our lead.” Beware self-anointed prophets! […]

4). “We missed out”: probably the most interesting theme is what I will call the We Missed Out theme. This theme arises in several discussions of the scientific and technological revolutions of the 20th century. Apparently, this theme is meant to demonstrate the superiority of a modernist worldview over and against a wholly Christian worldview. […]

5). Futility: without exception the addresses I read painted depressing portraits of women religious as a tiny rebel band fighting the Sheriff of Rome. As part of the insularity painted by these addresses is a tragic sense of loss and the futility of their “mission” in the face of overwhelming authoritarian oppression by men. Apparently, we are to believe that women religious in the U.S. are guerrilla-fighters engaged in a war of attrition against the Church. Unfortunately for them, the attrition is all on their side. Rhetorically, these portraits serve an important purpose: by painting themselves as righteous rebels fighting a losing battle against the Man, the sisters are able to both continue their rebellion and justify their material failures all the while claiming moral victory. Neat, uh?

6). Jesus ain’t the Way: also without exception the addresses forthrightly deny Jesus’ own claim that he is the Way, the Truth, and the Life. As a way of undermining the Church’s legitimate mission of evangelization, Jesus becomes just another good guy with a really cool message of pacificism, egalitarian communal life, and a feminist concern for eco-politics. In one address, delivered by Joan Chittister, the arrival of mosques in historically Christian lands is celebrated as a great advance for liberty and the pursuit of religious diversity. […]

7). Monotonality: the addresses are uniformly written and delivered by women religious who tell the gathered sisters only what they wanted to hear. There were no addresses that seriously challenged any of the preconceived notions held dear by these women. Without exception. the meme’s of “We Are the Future and Our Agenda is of God” is heard in terms of ecclesial revolution and theological dissent. Not one address challenged the sisters to rethink their assumptions along orthodox lines. Not one address asserted a theme, idea, theology, or political notion that would upset or stir the secular feminist pot these women are stewing in. […]

8). New Stories: as a result of the We Missed Out theme, the addresses pull on recent developments in cosmology to construct “new stories” about creation, space-time, human evolution, and the role of consciousness in our pursuit of holiness. Of course, none of these new stories read like anything found in scripture, tradition, science, or Church teaching. In fact, the purpose of the new stories is to lay a narrative foundation for a particularly gnostic-feminist view of the human person that “frees” us from the confines of patriarchal thinking by re-situating the human race as just another evolved species living and dying in a vast cosmos. Routinely, the addresses privilege “new cosmologies” over and against our biblical narratives of creation and the end of space-time, and undermine God’s Self-revelation in scripture. […]

If you are following the The Reform of LCWR at all, you should read the whole piece and file it away.

In the meantime, I suggest some of you readers go to the LCWR site and download some of their stuff before they change their page and make it disappear.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Magisterium of Nuns, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill | Tagged , ,
13 Comments

Obama’s surrogate in his attacks on Religious Liberty

This is Kathleen Sebelius, Pres. Obama’s surrogate at HHS, questioned on religious liberty.

FAIL.

I picked this up from Life News:

Sebelius Admits She’s Unaware of Top Religious Liberty Cases
by Jeanne Monahan

This morning in a hearing before the U.S. House of Representatives Education and Workforce Committee, HHS Secretary Sebelius was questioned by Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) on the topic of religious liberty. Specifically, Rep. Gowdy questioned Secretary Sebelius’ statement in her testimony indicating the careful consideration she undertook to “balance” religious liberty protections with preventive services in making the decision about the contraceptive mandate (which includes drugs that can cause abortions).

Rep. Gowdy asked the Secretary about the specifics of her “balance”. In doing so he explained three tests for legal balance, depending on the content and issues being weighed. He explained that because religious liberty is a fundamental right any decision that might violate it would require the strictest scrutiny.

Under oath, the nation’s HHS head stated that in making this decision and taking into consideration religious liberty issues, she relied on the expertise of HHS General Counsel. When questioned further about the counsel she received, the Secretary reported that guidance was provided entirely in discussion, and no legal memo was written on the topic. When asked further about her knowledge of the most significant cases related to religious liberty that have been decided by the Supreme Court, the Secretary responded that she was unaware/unfamiliar with these cases. It is a telling moment.

The full video is a must-see and just over five minutes:

[wp_youtube]NnO7qa7fMRc[/wp_youtube]

Posted in Emanations from Penumbras, Religious Liberty | Tagged , , ,
23 Comments

Now HERE’s a “worship schedule”!

A reader (and monthly donor!) alerted me to this great shot of a “worship schedule” posted on the blog Te igitur.

Ten Masses on Sundays
Eight Masses on Weekdays
Daily Vespers and Rosary
Daily confessions from 8 am till 8 pm

Not every place can do this, but some can!

Pray for vocations to the priesthood!

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Just Too Cool, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, The future and our choices | Tagged ,
18 Comments

Fishwrap’s good lesson in liberal tactics

As you watch the coverage of various dust-ups in the Church watch for a particular tactic used by the liberal left.

A great example comes to us today from the site of the National catholic Fishwrap about dissident priests in Ireland.

Get this:

DUBLIN, IRELAND — Just weeks after a report from a Vatican inquiry into the Irish church lamented what it described as “fairly widespread” dissent from church teaching, it was revealed that the Vatican has “silenced” Redemptorist Fr. Tony Flannery.

The Holy See’s move provoked fury among the members of the 800-strong Association of Catholic Priests, [… THERE’s something to lose sleep about…] which has accused the Vatican of issuing a fatwa against liberal clerics.

[NB] It’s not exactly clear why Flannery, a popular author and retreat director, has come under Vatican suspicion. He has voiced support in the past for opening up debates around the ordination of women, a change to the church’s ban on artificial birth control and an end to mandatory celibacy.

[…]

Gee, I dunno!  Why do you suppose such a wonderful priest would attract the eye of the CDF?

You have seen this same tactic from the supporters of the LCWR.  “We were so surprised! We have no idea why Rome is doing this to us! What could they mean by all this?”

At least now the LCWR isn’t alone in being persecuted.  This Irish Ass. of Catholic Priests is under siege as well.

 

Posted in Biased Media Coverage, Blatteroons, Dogs and Fleas, Magisterium of Nuns, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, The Drill, The future and our choices, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged , , , ,
23 Comments

UPDATE on the tumult in Platteville. Bp. Morlino sends a letter to the community.

A little while I posted an update about a group of liberals in Platteville, WI (D. Madison) who, rebelling against their priests, worked to undermine the finances of the parish and school. The fruit of their labors has now come to light. It is necessary to close the parish school.

This sad situation has something important to say to people in other places where there may be tensions between priests, bishops, laity.

The Diocese of Madison has a posted on their website a letter from His Excellency Most Rev. Robert C. Morlino.  PDF HERE.  You will find a 3 page letter with Bp. Morlino’s explanation of the situation, his decisions, and his pastoral reflection, and then 2 pages of citations from documents of the Church, including Lumen gentium of Vatican II, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, and the Code of Canon Law.

A point that comes through in Bp. Morlino’s letter (we are seeing his response and not the correspondence -and gossip, apparently – that he has received) is that those who are fighting against their priests are making a hell of a tumult.

In Bp. Morlino’s letter there is the suggestion that if the tumult continues there could be “issuance of Canonical warnings“.  He repeats the possibility later in the phrase “… formal warning and action“.

When, in this ever-so-pastoral day and age, you see that sort of language coming from a bishop in a public letter, you know that someone is in spiritual danger.

Aside from that, in this day when both the substitution of feelings for reason and the solipsistic exaltation of poorly understood “rights” cause pastors of souls no small difficulties, Bp. Morlino gets to the nub of a problem:

Excerpt:

Your feelings do matter to me, and I do not take them lightly. However, our end goal should not be simply to restore good feelings. No, there is something greater than good feelings at stake, as good feelings come and go. Much deeper than feelings, what these priests have been sent to offer, is Jesus Christ, He who suffered with and like you, who died for you, and who has been raised to new life, so that you might have lasting joy, lasting hope, and lasting peace – eternal life. The reality of following Jesus is not at every moment full of good feelings; neither Jesus Himself, in His human nature, nor Mary, nor the Apostles were even granted that gift of freedom from painful emotions. By allowing ourselves, with openness, to enter into the mystery of His Church and His Sacraments we find that deep inner joy which passing emotions can’t eradicate.

And then:

There can be no “firing” of priests by the parish community in the Diocese of Madison.  Thus, the priests of the Society of Jesus Christ the Priest will remain in priestly ministry at St. Mary and St. Augustine Parishes in Platteville, and they stand ready to serve you and to seek stability, understanding, and healing. I beg you to seek the same so that the light of Christ might shine. I ask you to forgive, whatever that takes, and to move forward in faith, in hope, and in love.

I cannot (and don’t want to) look into the minds of liberals to figure out what they are really after, but if there is in those minds any shred of Catholic identity left, properly understood, any sense that Christ gave to Holy Church bishops and priests in Holy ORDERS, to order the Church for the sake of the salvation of souls, to sanctify, to teach, and also to govern, I suggest to the folks who have carried on this tumult against authority – regardless of how it was sparked off – to consider the implications of “formal warning and action”.

And you can bet they will read this.

In this day when a theology of the role of laity in Holy Church has been vastly expanded and our practical understanding expanded with it, something pretty dire must be going on when we read about a bishop who sees a possible need for canonical warnings.  That means there is spiritual peril on the horizon.

I pray that the lay people involved will give due consideration to all the elements of the bishop’s letter, which demonstrates a sincere effort to find a way through and beyond the conflict.

“But Father! But Father!” some of you are saying by now, “Why are you, with this big visible blog giving attention to something in a remote corner of the global Church?  Don’t you have bigger fish to fry?”

Yes, and no.

This sad situation in this small town underscores some important problems and we will be seeing a lot more of this in the future.

The decades following Vatican II devastated our Catholic identity.  Leaving aside for now the reasons for this, putting aside blame, we see more and more a sharp and outright rebellion against the Church’s teaching authority in faith and morals and also against her duly appointed, God-anointed pastors.  The poor catechesis and spirit of dissent, fostered for so long, is rumbling to the surface in an exaltation of improperly understood “rights”.  People who have no idea what they are talking about when they speak of their “rights” because they are “baptized” (or whatever – cf. the serpent’s lie to Adam and Eve), are claiming authority to themselves to do, essentially, as they please without reference to their vocations in the Church or the Church’s Magisterium.  There are ecclesiological strains building within many sectors of the Church’s life, like pressures that build on fault lines in the Earth’s crust.

Let’s put this another way and with a less seismological metaphor.

A properly understood and embraced Catholic identity does not mean that no one can say anything to authority.  But it does mean that roles in the Church must be recognized for what they are.  In the ancient Church there could be literal rioting in the streets when bishops and flocks were in conflict.  That’s what comes with the miter and staff.  That’s what comes from belonging to a Church made up of sinners… not made up primarily of sinners, but (in our Church Militant) entirely of sinners. Bishops, priests, religious, laity – every single one a sinner.  But in the end, when there are conflicts, it is the role of bishops to make the decisions.  We might not like the decisions. It may be hard to accept them.  We may think they are impractical, wrong, unjust.  But Catholics accept hard decisions in view of the long term, in view of a larger Church, in view of our vocations in the here and now.  We must learn through pain and tears to see that, yes, even in the hard decisions, God’s will shall come to pass, and that God’s will is always the best thing for us.

The Church has always had its share of cafeterias.  In these cafeterias we will always see ugly food fights.

Frankly, I think ugly food fights must happen from time to time.

But when the food has been thrown, and everyone is a little messy, it is time to clean up.

Let the people who start throwing food (the liberals who attacked the priests) remember that, at the end of the fight, there is less for people to eat. Because of their choice to fight, some are going to go hungry.

Posted in "But Father! But Father!", "How To..." - Practical Notes, Mail from priests, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, Priests and Priesthood, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , , , ,
33 Comments

“To me, the most serious element in all this was the breach of fundamental, liturgical consciousness.”

Please use the sharing buttons!  Thanks!

In Co-Workers of the Truth: Meditations for Every Day of the Year, from the works Joseph Ratzinger (you know who) for 25 April we read a blurb from his perennially useful Feast of Faith (US link HERE, US Kindle HERE, UK HERE, UK Kindle HERE):

“The Council did not create new articles of faith, nor did it replace existing ones with new ones. Its only concern was to make it possible to hold the same faith under different circumstances, to revitalize it. As for the work that preceded the Council, it seems to have been more intensive in Germany than elsewhere, for Germany was the heartland of the liturgical movement, the primary source in which the documents of the Council had their origin. But many of these documents were issued too abruptly. To many of the faithful, most of them seemed to be a challenge to the creativity of the individual congregation, in which separate groups constructed their own “liturgies” from week to week with a zeal that was as commendable as it was misplaced. To me, the most serious element in all this was the breach of fundamental, liturgical consciousness. The difference between liturgy and festivity, between liturgy and social event, disappeared gradually and imperceptibly, as witness the fact that many priests, imitating the etiquette of polite society, feel that they ought not to receive Holy Communion until the congregation has received; that they should no longer venture to say “I bless you” [German euch: familiar form of plural “you”]—thus dissolving the fundamental liturgical relationship between them and their congregation. In this context belong also the often obnoxious and banal greeting which, it must be admitted, many congregations tolerate with a kind of patient forbearance. In the period before the new missal made its appearance, but after the old one had already been characterized as “old-fashioned”, people forgot that there is a “rite”, that is, a prescribed liturgical form, and that liturgy is genuinely liturgy only if it is not subject to the will of those who celebrate it.”  See: The Feast of Faith, pp. 83–85.

Any effort of renewal of any sphere of our Church and lives must be preceded by and accompanied with a revitalization of our liturgical worship.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged , , , , ,
14 Comments