Fr. Z's Blog | Catholic commentary by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

DETROIT: 11 June – CALL TO HOLINESS CONFERENCE!

Posted on 10 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

On Saturday, 11 June the annual Call To Holiness conference will he held in Livonia, MI near Detroit.

Speakers include:
Jeff Cavins
Fr. Clement Machado, SOLT
Paul Rondeau
Raymond de Souza
Johnnette Benkovic
Fr. Edmund McCaffrey, OblSD
Al Kresta

Archbp. Alan Vigneron sent a warm message of support for Call To Holiness.

I have spoken at Call To Holiness in the past. It is a fine event.

Also, this weekend in Detroit there will be a gather of dissenters called the American Catholic Council. Archbishop Alan Vigneron has made it clear that this ACC group has nothing to do with the Archdiocese of Detroit. The ACC should not be given any support.

There is some Q&A about the ACC on the site of the Archdiocese of Detroit.

Archbp. Vigneron’s statement.

The Call To Holiness Conference will be as good as the ACC thing is bad.

Posted in Our Catholic Identity, The Campus Telephone Pole | Tagged Call To Holiness, Detroit
11 Comments

QUAERITUR: Does the SSPX say the Ordinary Form is invalid or not legitimate?

Posted on 10 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Universae Ecclesiae 8 says that those who request Mass and the sacraments in the Extraordinary Form “must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church.”

Our friends at Rorate have a translation of an interview with Msgr. Guido Pozzo, Secretary of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei“. Here is the first part:

[UPDATED] From an extensive interview granted by the Secretary of the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei”, Mgr. Guido Pozzo, to Nouvelles de France.

“The faithful who ask for the celebration of the forma extraordinaria must not in any way support or belong to groups which show themselves to be against the validity or legitimacy of the Holy Mass or the Sacraments celebrated in the forma ordinaria or against the Roman Pontiff as Supreme Pastor of the Universal Church.” (Instruction Universae Ecclesiae, n. 19). Is this remark directed at the Fraternity of Saint Pius X?

The article of the Instruction to which you refer is related to certain groups of faithful who consider or propose an antithesis between the Missal of 1962 and that of Paul VI, and who believe that the rite promulgated by Paul VI for the celebration of the Sacrifice of the Holy Mass is detrimental to the faithful. I wish to make it clear that it is clearly necessary to distinguish the rite and the Missal in themselves, celebrated according to the norms, and a certain understanding and application of the liturgical reform, characterized by ambiguity, doctrinal deformations, abuses and banalizations, events that are unfortunately so common that they led Cardinal J. Ratzinger to speak, without hesitations, in one of his publications of a “collapse of the liturgy”. It would be unfair and false to consider the reformed Missal the cause of such a collapse. At the same time, it is necessary to receive the doctrine and the discipline that Pope Benedict XVI gave us in his Apostolic Letter Summorum Pontificum for the restoration of the extraordinary form of the ancient Roman Rite and to follow the exemplary manner in which the Holy Father celebrates Holy Mass in the ordinary form at Saint Peter’s, in his pastoral visits, and in his apostolic journeys.

Does the Fraternity of Saint Pius X recognize this missal [of Paul VI] as valid and licit?

It is the Fraternity of Saint Pius X that should be asked that.

[…]

Read the rest there.

This does underscore an important question.

I think most members of the SSPX will say that the Novus Ordo is valid. But will they affirm its legitimacy? I have my doubts.

Keep in mind that there is a distinction between the members of the SSPX and the followers of the members of the SSPX. SSPX, or better, FSSPX, is the “Priestly Fraternity of St. Pius X”. Fr. Sven O’Brien may be a member, but Mrs. Mary Bagofdoughnuts is a follower.

UPDATE 1607 GMT:

You readers are a great resource! I no soon post this, but several people alert me, as if by magic, to a page on the American District SSPX’s site about this very question. The title of the page: “Is the New Mass legit?” It is a response to UE 8.

Here is something salient:

A. The legality of the New Mass

A law is legitimate only when it is duly promulgated by the lawfully constituted authority. But to this condition must be added another of supreme importance and essential to make it a law: it must be for the common good.1 And precisely on this score, the Novus Ordo Missae (NOM) is most defective as was attested at the time of its promulgation by no less than Cardinals Ottaviani and Bacci: … [Though it must be observed that the Lawgiver (the Supreme Pontiff) perhaps thought it was for the common good. Neither Ottaviani and Bacci were the Lawgiver.]

[…]

We need to look at the Apostolic Constitution Missale Romanum (April 3, 1969) which allegedly promulgated the NOM. … [It either did or it didn’t.]

[…]

Most of the piece focuses on why the Novus Ordo is not as good at the pre-Conciliar form, theological deficiencies, pressure on the Pope, the influence of ecumenism, etc. However, the overall position is that the Novus Ordo, while not very good for us, is nevertheless valid.

Those statements above suggest to me that the person who wrote that page does not think that the Novus Ordo is legitimate. I know this is on the SSPX site for the USA. Does it reflect accurately the thought of the rest of the SSPX’s member and its leadership?

Posted in Ecclesiae unitatem, SUMMORUM PONTIFICUM, The future and our choices, Universae Ecclesiae | Tagged Msgr. Guido Pozzo, SSPX, UE 8, Universae Ecclesiae
124 Comments

Of Richard McBrien and the persecution of the Catholic Church in China

Posted on 10 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The gentlemanly Sando Magister has a must-read piece today at his site Chiesa called: Bishops Or Mandarins? The Dilemma of the Chinese Church.

Here is the introductory section of Magister’s piece, just to give you some context. Then I will give the selection from an interview with the new Chinese-born Archbishop Secretary of Propaganda Fide which left me troubled and angry.

ROME, June 10, 2011 – The Patriotic Association of Chinese Catholics, the organism with which the Beijing authorities assert the “autonomy” [a key point] of the Chinese Church from the pope, has been threatening for some time to create a dozen new bishops of its own, ordained without the approval of Rome.

On November 20, 2010, the threat was realized with the illegitimate ordination in Chengde of a new bishop, Joseph Guo Jincai.

And another illicit ordination was scheduled for yesterday, Thursday, June 9, in the diocese of Hankow.

In extremis, however, this ordination was postponed. With no explanation of why.

But everything points to the influence of resistance from the faithful and from the candidate himself, the priest Shen Guoan. [The people themselves and the candidate stood firm.]

And perhaps there was even more influence from the energy with which from Rome, on June 3, the new secretary of the congregation for the evangelization of peoples, [Archbp.] Savio Hon Taifai.

The frankness with which Archbishop Hon expressed his criticisms of the ecclesiastical policy of Beijing and of the part of the Chinese Church that submits to it confirms that a stance of confrontation, instead of accommodation, prevails in Rome.

The following are the most significant passages of the interview with Hon, now considered the main strategist of Vatican policy on China.

[…]

Magister’s piece then has the salient bits from the interview done originally with Asia News. Here are the headers.

On the threatened illegitimate episcopal ordination of Hankow
On the consequences of illegitimate ordinations
On why some bishops and priests submit
More on those who submit, and those who instead resist
On a way out for the weakest
On the steps to be taken with illegitimate bishops

And then we come to these last two excerpts:

– On the support given [get this] by American and European theologians to the “autonomy” of the Chinese Church

HON: Unfortunately, there is a theology in America and Europe that is also penetrating into the Chinese Church. This theology claims precisely autonomy in the selection of bishops, and independence from the Holy See. And so there are persons in America and Europe who are pushing the Chinese bishops to behave this way. “If you succeed,” they say, “we will follow you.”

Until a short time ago, these problems of independence and autonomy were only at the level of governance. Now they are also at the theological level.

– On how to free the bishops in prison

HON: In all the encounters with representatives of the Chinese government, we constantly insist on the liberation of these brothers of ours. But the government doesn’t pay any attention to us. These bishops are elderly, their liberation should also be a humanitarian act. But unfortunately, we do not receive any response. Maybe public appeals should be made, instead of asking in private.

In practical terms, supporting “autonomy” from Rome, in China, means prison and persecution for faithful Catholics.

Archbishop Hon is talking about the theological corrosion coming from America and Europe, which undermines faithful Catholics. He talks about the theological support given to the the government-sponsored Church, the Patriotic Association … from American sources.

Richard McBrien of the National catholic Reporter incessantly pushes for the autonomy of local Churches and tries to diminish the role of the Roman Pontiff. McBrien harps on authority from below and the election of bishops and their appointment not by the Pope or his delegates, or those whom he chooses to consult, but by local Churches.

At the time I am writing, on the site of the National catholic Fishwrap, McBrien has a piece in which he pushes precisely the sort of autonomy that Archbishop Hon says is resulting in problems for faithful Catholics in China.

This is how McBrien begins:

The sacking of William Morris as bishop of the Australian diocese of Toowoomba raises more than a few theological questions about the relationship between bishops and the Bishop of Rome.

Many Catholics believe, and so apparently does Benedict XVI, that the Bishop of Rome is free, by the will of Christ, not only to appoint all bishops in the Roman Catholic church, but to dismiss them as well.This is an incorrect assumption, and the firing of Bishop Morris provides us with a teachable moment in ecclesiology.

[…]

In China, bishops, priests, lay faithful who are faithful to the Catholic Church are persecuted.

Meanwhile, McBrien and his crowd are giving comfort and aid to the persecutors.

Finally… this is not merely a matter of exporting really bad ideas to China. McBrien and his lot are trying to import the model of the Patriotic Association to the United States.

Of Richard McBrien and the persecution of the Catholic Church in China

Protest Fishwrap.

Posted in New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged Archbp. Hon, China, NCFishwrap, Richard McBrien
15 Comments

But wait! There’s more!

Posted on 10 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Have any of you ever ordered something through those fast talking and annoying TV ads?

Posted in Lighter fare |
30 Comments

If web browsers were cars

Posted on 10 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

This came from one of our readers. It originated on the site of Regina Web Services.

Enjoy!

If Web Browsers Were Cars…

IE6: original VW Beetle: at the time of launch it was the browser. Netscape Navigator was dead, Mozilla Suite was too bloated and slow to get anything done in a reasonable amount of time, development of Firefox as a stand-alone browser had not yet begun, and there was no other legitimate competitor on Windows (Sun Hot Java anyone?). It was unique — ie: didn’t follow CSS web standards — but then again CSS wasn’t popular in the same way it is now. And because IE6 held the overwhelming majority of market share and there was a lack of viable competition MSFT quit innovating (there was also some in-fighting at MSFT between the Trident team (IE) and the Office team which caused development of IE to stall for a few years… oh and they had the Longhorn/Vista debacle in progress). Like the Beetle, IE6 was a great at it’s launch, and like the Beetle, it was never really updated while the competition innovated, hustled, and roared right by them.

IE7: Yugo pickup (okay, there never was such a thing, but bear with me here) – able to render either IE6 native mode or semi-standards-compliant IE7 mode and smart enough to detect which and switch to that mode… except that the auto-detection never worked and the browser locked up in either mode. The worst browser in the IE series since version 3.

IE8: Dodge Neon – surprisingly good for a Microsoft browser when it launched. Well, surprising that MSFT corrected the downward slide and didn’t make a browser that was worse than the previous one as they had with IE7. While an improvement, IE8 was still unstable and prone to schizophrenic performance. Auto-detection of IE-mode and standards-compliant mode still didn’t work (I think it was turned off and defaulted to standards-compliant) but as designers defaulted to writing standards compliance sites IE8 gave the illusion of working more than it was failing.

Firefox: military Humvee – you can attach just about any plug-in or extension, it works on almost every operating system ever created or imagined, handles almost every website (even horribly mis-coded ones), is rugged, not terribly fast but gets the job done almost all the time (and blows up so spectacularly when it does fail that you don’t mind the inconvenience of having to start over). Still the go-to browser for several specialty plug-ins like Firebug, Web Developer, downloading flash videos, and more.

Chrome: Formula One racer – fast, agile, decked out with lots of options (via extensions), but finicky at times which can be really annoying. Never fear though: just wait a couple days and the engineers at Google will release a new version with the annoying parts totally re-coded and rock-solid. A joy to use and mostly stable (though the fade-to-white crashes are rather un-Googlesque and lacking in flair). Probably the best browser available on Windows and Mac OS X at this time.

IE9: Chevy Malibu – it’s finally catching up with the better competition and is a fine browser but missing the bells and whistles of the competition. Nobody is complaining about it though because it’s so much better than previous versions of IE. If you’re a long-suffering user of Internet Explorer then using IE9 for the fist time is like the day your abusive step-father found religion and stopped beating you. Life may not be perfect, but it’s a huge improvement over what it used to be.

Apple Safari: Tesla Roadster – a great browser… but who cares? Same fast, stable, KHTML-derived WebKit rending engine as Chrome but without the extensions ecosystem. On Mac OS X Safari is what IE should have always been: a reliable, no frills web browser that serves up web content and that’s it. On Windows it’s a fish out of water. On Mars. Trying to communicate with the natives in Chinese… what’s the point again?

IE10: Hydrogen powered, 75 mpg, Honda NSX with all-wheel drive, room for 12 passengers, six-ton towing capacity, and telepathic navigational input – it promises to be all things to all users (like lots of MSFT products) and will never materialize as promised. Instead we’ll get a mildly improved IE9 with a 3% more standards compliance, a slightly faster javascript engine, native-mode Silverlight engine (awesome for the 0.01% of people who rely in this). In car terms it will be a Ford Focus: a nice subcompact car with decent performance and style, but still just frill-free basic transportation… which for non-browser-snobs is enough.
ntegration or opposition, culture was constructed.”

He adds:

With the advent of the electronic book, how is this function exercised? How is the authenticity of a text of the Word of God, of the prayers of the Church or the Catechism guaranteed? The written word, guarded by the Church, needs to be transmitted in all of its purity to future generations. Decisive steps are now needed to clarify how to provide this service to the truth in an electronic universe.

I’m still waiting for my Bugatti, Veyron. I’d settle for a browser that did it all and didn’t hog resources.

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged browsers
20 Comments

REQUEST for the Novena before Pentecost

Posted on 9 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Dear readers,

Since it is Ascension THURSDAY, when the first novena of prayer before Pentecost began for the Lord’s Blessed Mother and His Apostles, I have it in mind to start a novena of my own for two personal and important intentions.

Will you, during this novena before Pentecost, also say a daily prayer for my intentions?

Here is a link to a novena to the Holy Spirit which could be used.

DAY ONE:

I suspected that,when I defended and asked for prayers for Bp. Finn, something bad would happen. Something bad has happened. So, I ask your prayers for the period of the novena leading up to Pentecost.

DAY TWO:

Looking for support of prayer still, as I keep my own courage up. Also, I ask for a prayer for a priest acquaintance who is in the hospital with some serious problems: Fr. RH.

DAY THREE:

Satan presses.

DAY FOUR:

Please keep up your prayers. Please do.

DAY FIVE:

About all I can say is that I persevere. And do pray again for Fr. RH who is not doing well at all.

DAY SIX:

Please continue with a prayer for my intentions.

DAY SEVEN:

If your attention span has lasted this long, please pray for my two important personal intentions.

DAY EIGHT:

Please do not forget.

DAY NINE:

Hoping for some necessary results from this novena.

Posted in Pray For A Miracle | Tagged novena, Pentecost
78 Comments

The Feeder Feed: Hummingbird Edition

Posted on 9 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

There are zillions of humming birds this year.

Here are few shots.

Posted in The Feeder Feed |
10 Comments

Does this seem to you to be a new journalistic low?

Posted on 9 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I haven’t ever heard of anything like this, except in my sometime-interest in astronomy, when people were recruited to monitor big listening arrays or perhaps help map the genome.

The Washington Post has asked for 100 volunteer readers to go through some 24K emails from Gov. Sarah Palin’s tenure as Governor of Alaska.

Can we imagine they are looking for the good things she did as Governor with the purpose of praising her? Surely there will be some. If they find those things will they report them? Do we expect stories about how, as Governor, she – say – helped a vet get a new wheelchair?

My initial reaction is one of contempt. And I am pretty sure I would have the same reaction were this about a politician whose career I find loathsome, such as an aggressively pro-abortion “catholic”.

Enlist volunteers for this?

Does this seem to you to be a weird journalistic low? Am I wrong?

Posted in Biased Media Coverage | Tagged Sarah Palin, WaPo, Washington Post
38 Comments

D. Kansas City-St. Joseph: press release about controversies

Posted on 9 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

The secular press in Kansas City, MO and the ultra-liberal, doctrine-dissenting, KC-based National catholic Reporter have been busy trying to tear the guts out of the diocese and Most Rev. Robert Finn, bishop, but not yet martyr.

From the site of the Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph.

[wp_youtube]Wa8w1kWnDHs[/wp_youtube]

Also, read this, from the site of the Diocese.

Bishop Finn Initiates Sweeping Changes and Reviews

Jun 9th, 2011

Five-Point Plan in Effect

Diocese engages Todd Graves, former U.S. Department of Justice child exploitation expert and former U.S. Attorney

(KANSAS CITY, MO, June 9, 2011) – To immediately fulfill his “call for change,” Bishop Robert Finn, of the Diocese of Kansas City ~ St Joseph, today announced the first immediate five points of a sweeping plan to deal with recent alleged sexual misconduct in the diocese.

The diocese said further initiatives will be announced in the coming weeks.

The Initial Five-point Plan

1. Immediate appointment of former national co-chair of the Department of Justice Child Exploitation Working Group and former U.S. Attorney to conduct an independent investigation of events, policies and procedures,

2. Appointment of an independent public liaison and ombudsman to field and investigate any reports of suspicious or inappropriate behavior,

3. Reaffirmation of current diocesan policy and immediate commencement of an independent review of the policies for Ethical Codes of Conduct and Sexual Misconduct,

4. An in-depth review of diocesan personnel training regarding the Ethical Codes of Conduct and the policy on Sexual Misconduct,

5. Continued cooperation with local law enforcement.

Bishop Finn stated, “These are initial steps. Other actions are forthcoming.”

Former U.S. Attorney Engaged

Former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Missouri Todd P. Graves will conduct an independent review of all issues regarding the Ratigan matter, as well as lead an independent and complete review of the diocesan Ethical Codes of Conduct and Sexual Misconduct policies, procedures and training.

From 2001 to 2005, Mr. Graves served as the national co-chair of the Department of Justice Child Exploitation Working Group. As U.S. Attorney, he established state and federal task forces to investigate exploitation of children through the Internet and was instrumental in locating a Regional Computer Forensics Laboratory in Kansas City. Throughout his career, Mr. Graves has been at the forefront in enforcing laws against those who abuse children.

Bishop Finn said the review will bring clarity out of the “shame, anger, and confusion” surrounding the May 19 arrest of Father Shawn Ratigan, who faces charges of possession of child pornography.

“In addition to our ongoing and full cooperation with law enforcement, this review will help us to determine the effectiveness of diocesan policies and procedures in a very troubling situation,” the Bishop explained.

At the conclusion of the review, Mr. Graves will issue a report. The report will be made public. The review is estimated to take approximately 30 to 45 days. Bishop Finn pledged the complete cooperation of all diocesan personnel.

Appointment of Public Liaison and Ombudsman

In the coming weeks, Bishop Finn will appoint a public liaison and ombudsman as the receiving agent and initial investigation point for any reports of misconduct by a diocesan priest, deacon, employee or program volunteer.

The public liaison and ombudsman will screen and investigate any reports on complaints made and consult with law enforcement as appropriate. The ombudsman will be available to anyone who wishes to report a concern through a confidential telephone number and email address.

“This immediate action will ensure all concerns are addressed confidentially, respectfully, promptly and appropriately,” said Bishop Finn.

Reaffirmation of Current Diocesan Policies

While awaiting recommendations for changes resulting from the independent internal investigation, Bishop Finn reaffirmed current diocesan policies that guide the response to reports of abuse. Members of the clergy and diocesan employees have been advised to review the Ethical Codes of Conduct and the policy regarding Sexual Misconduct.

As early as 1988, the diocese adopted a formal policy for responding to allegations of sexual abuse. The policy established a Diocesan Response Team to provide support for persons making complaints. The policy required full cooperation with the laws of Missouri for reporting child sexual abuse. By 1993, diocesan practice reflected growing lay involvement with the creation of an Independent Review Board.

Diocesan Policies Require

• protecting children in all church, school and program settings,

• pending a full investigation, removing ministers and employees from service when reasonable suspicion exists,

• counseling and pastoral support for persons making a complaint,

• advising people making complaints of their rights to go to civil authorities or the media, and,

• ensuring that lay professionals respond to and give advice about complaints and fitness for ministry.

In 2002, the diocese mandated multi-jurisdictional criminal background screening and safe environment training for all adults working or volunteering with children. The Protecting God’s Children program identifies the warning signs of abuse and teaches strategies for maintaining safe environments for children. By May 2011, this program had reached more than 20,500 people.

“The best way to deal with a problem is to prevent wrongdoing,” said Bishop Finn. “We believe that, when adults who interact with children increase their awareness of child sexual abuse, they form a shield that protects children,” he said.

As a companion to the adult safe environment training, the diocese implemented developmentally appropriate personal safety training for all children and youth in 2006. Through Catholic schools and parish programs the diocese reaches some 16,000 children each year. Circle of Grace is an ongoing part of the curricula for all Pre-Kindergarten through eighth grade, and Called to Protect reaches all high school aged students.

Apology

The Bishop concluded with the words he delivered to the diocese this past Sunday:

“As bishop, I take full responsibility for these failures and sincerely apologize to you for them. Clearly, we have to do more,” said Bishop Finn. “While we must deal with these difficult and trying issues, we also must give thanks for the daily accomplishments of our lay faithful, priests and others for the many good works that continue on behalf of neighbors, sick or poor, young or old.”

Posted in Biased Media Coverage, Clerical Sexual Abuse, The Drill, The Last Acceptable Prejudice, Throwing a Nutty | Tagged Bp. Finn, clerical sexual abuse, D. Kansas City-St. Joseph, NCFishwrap
26 Comments

NCFishwrap’s little problem with the Extraordinary Form and “altar girls”

Posted on 9 June 2011 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

NCFishwrap today surfed the little server girl issue over its mosh pit.

catholic reporters that that are, they left off attacking Bp. Finn for a minute or two to post – at long last- the news that the PCED has “ruled” that females may not serve Mass in the Extraordinary Form.

Universae Ecclesiae 28 made that clear, but in the face of challenges the Pontifical Commission “Ecclesia Dei” explained what UE 28 means.

The best comment so far over at Fishwrap is, and I am not making this up:

I guess when you’ve been slam dancing for a long time, you can get a little distracted.

To be fair, the comments here are not always uniformly perfect or elevating either!

On that note, rather than just post something in the combox below along the usual lines (“Those people are so …. uhhhhh …. ! What a bunch of poopy-heads!”), it might be good just to protest 1) by sending me a donation and 2) by making well-reasoned comments here below on the reasons why women properly don’t and/or should not serve at the altar in the Roman Rite.