Fr. Z's Blog | Formerly entitled: "What Does The Prayer Really Say?" – Clear, straight commentary on Catholic issues, liturgy and life by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf o{]:¬)

ASK FATHER: Should I consider permanent diaconate if I can’t serve the traditional community?

Posted on 26 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

deacon_dalmatic_02 From a reader…

My pastor and several bishops have urged me to enter the diocesan permanent diaconate program. I will be beginning my studies in Sacred Theology this September. But I am having second thoughts, mainly because I have been hearing opinions from priests belonging to Ecclesia Dei communities, that they dislike the concept of married deacons, and that they would not serve at the altar with somebody who is not committed to the sacrifice by living a celibate life. I am afraid, that the traditional community would not accept me. Must I now choose between the diaconate and being a traditional catholic? Are the two really not compatible?

I can’t speak to the attitudes of priests of “Ecclesia Dei communities” in your area.

However, it is just plain silly to suggest that permanent deacons are not able to serve – or shouldn’t be allowed to serve – in the traditional Roman Rite.

Deacons are deacons are deacons.

Of course there is a debate about married deacons and continence. Ed Peters has made a strong case that married deacons should be continent. The basic argument is this. In the Latin Church clerics are bound by can. 277 to observe perfect and perpetual continence. This is supported by tradition. All deacons are clerics. Hence, all deacons, including married deacons, are bound to be continent.

I supppose that some priests of “Ecclesia Dei communities” in your area might add that, if the permanent deacons are not continent, they are not acting as deacons ought. That being the case, they shouldn’t serve. However, priests of “Ecclesia Dei communities” in your area can’t know how a deacon is living. They presume to know what they can’t, and ought not, know. So, do they commit the sin of rash judgment about the deacons whom they meet?

In any event, a deacon is a deacon is a deacon. Transitional deacons are not “more deacony” than permanent deacons.

Furthermore, given that the Solemn Mass of the Roman Rite should be preferred to the mere Sung Mass or the Low Mass, and that they cannot be celebrated without an additional priest or deacon for the diaconal roll, what are these priests of “Ecclesia Dei communities” in your area trying to accomplish?

Subsequently, if you have strong concerns, give yourself some time and talk with your confessor and with wise priests who know the score. And remember that priests of “Ecclesia Dei communities” in your area will be rotated out to serve someplace else… or at least that is what usually happens.

All these things having been considered, ponder deeply that you – as you say – have been urged to enter formation for the diaconate by “several bishops”. That’s not nothing! If bishops are asking this of you, pay attention. Service to Holy Church may or may not include service in traditional forms of the Roman Rite.

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

ASK FATHER: Deacons in Novus Ordo Masses

Posted on 25 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

Father, can you please shed some light on GIRM #171-173 (and there abouts), regarding the position of the Deacon during the procession to and from the altar?

We were instructed in the seminary to be in front of the priest. I am seeing more and more (even on EWTN) the deacon walking in procession to and from the altar NEXT to the priest. This seems to be wrong. It “appears” then as the Deacon is equal in all aspects to the priest. In fact, in my diocese deacons have been asked to not conduct any, so called, “Communion Service” because it “looks” like he is offering the Mass in the eyes of many of the laity. At Masses where the Deacon preaches, I have even heard parishioners say to the Deacon after Mass: “nice Mass Father.” And the Deacon, of course, never correctes them. Is the statement about being “next to the priest” meant for only within the sanctuary, or only as an alternative to being in front of the priest during the procession, as when not carrying the Book of the Gospels? I believe there is another part of the GIRM (escapes me at the moment) that states the Deacon exits the same way he enters. I would read that as, if entering carrying the Gospels in front of the priest, then you should leave in front of the priest even if not carrying the Gospels.

It seems, our “Uppity Deacons” today enjoy making issues of virtually everything.

Thank you Father, for your wise and much appreciated thoughts.

It has been a long time since I had a deacon for a Novus Ordo Mass, and it has been a really long time since I was a deacon for a Novus Ordo Mass. I was deacon for a Solemn TLM last Sunday, however. During that Mass I walked at the side of the priest on the way in and during the Vidi aquam, because he was in cope and because I had to carry the aspersorium. If there had not been a Vidi aquam I would have walked in front of the priest. I also walked at the priest’s side from the sedilia to the altar. It was pretty clear that the priest was the priest and that the deacon was the deacon: we were dressed differently. At the conclusion of Mass, I walked in front of the priest. That’s how we do it in the Roman Rite… traditionally.

What does the GRIM say?

171. When he is present at the celebration of the Eucharist, a Deacon should exercise his ministry, wearing sacred vestments. In fact, the Deacon:

a) assists the Priest and walks at his side;

[…]

172. Carrying the Book of the Gospels slightly elevated, the Deacon precedes the Priest as he approaches the altar or else walks at the Priest’s side.

I believe the GIRM says that the deacon walks in front of the priest in the entrance procession when he carries the Evangelarium. I suppose then that if he goes in in front of the priest, he should leave that way too.

Perhaps this is a chance for enrichment of the Novus Ordo. Perhaps the more traditional entrance and exit would be a good idea.

I suspect that there are deacons who would like to jump in.

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

ASK FATHER: Do I fulfill my Sunday obligation at an Eastern or SSPX church?

Posted on 25 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

From a reader…

Are SSPX Masses and Eucharist licit for Roman Catholics? This Triduum was heart-wrenching as we had the “full band” (organ, piano, guitar, drums and cymbals) playing during Holy Thursday AND Good Friday!

There is no Tridentine Mass celebrated in my area. I have increasing doubts as to the validity of the NO. There is an SSPX parish several towns over, also a Ukranian Byzantine Catholic Church within 45 minutes of here. I love God, and I love my faith, but truly feel the NO has been protestantized (is that even a word?). Yes, I have spoken to our priests. Their responses were “I’ve heard that from several other parshioners as well”.

I’m sorry that you have had to suffer in that way.

Without question the Novus Ordo is valid. The Eucharist is confected and Holy Mass is celebrated. Sadly, the Novus Ordo lends itself to abuses. However, it can be celebrated reverently and in a traditional way. If it is possible to protestantize the NO it is also possible to traditionalize it. Way too much depends on the whims of the priest and those whom he designates to help.

And now to the question which has been answered here many times before.

Masses celebrated by the SSPX are valid. They have valid Holy Orders. They validly consecrate the Eucharist. They undoubtedly celebrate Mass using a Catholic rite, since it is the legitimate traditional Roman Rite which was never abrogated, even with the introduction of the Novus Ordo.

The Code of Canon Law for the Latin Church says:

can. 1248 1. The precept of participating in the Mass is satisfied by assistance at a Mass which is celebrated anywhere in a Catholic rite either on the holy day or on the evening of the preceding day.

This means that if you go to a chapel of the SSPX on the day of precept (such as a Sunday) or the evening before and attend Holy Mass, you fulfill your obligation… silly claims to the contrary notwithstanding.

The Holy See has clarified that this is so.

Also, there is no question that you fulfill your obligation by attending the Divine Liturgy of a Catholic (not Orthodox) Eastern Church, such as the Ukrainian Catholic Church or a Maronite Catholic Church, etc. They, too, celebrate in a Catholic Rite. You may go to these churches and you may receive Holy Communion. I suggest that you not be the first to present yourself for Communion if you are not familiar with how it is distributed. It is distributed by the priest with a spoon directly into the mouth. Watch others first. Do not close your mouth on the spoon! That’s a no no. Attending Eastern Catholic Divine Liturgy can be a tremendous experience, especially when the choir and acoustics are good.

I have never recommended that people regularly frequent chapels of the SSPX. A great deal depends on the priests of these chapels. If they get the “wrong guy” as it were, people can undermine their unity with the Roman Pontiff by taking in the wrong message. The risk of this erosion of unity could in part depend on the manner of preaching and many other factors.

Mind you, I think this erosion take place on a huge scale at “legitimate” parishes which lean liberal! For decades, countless Catholics have been starved of sound doctrine and their faith eroded by dreadful worship. It is a sad fact that the SSPX, which is so Catholic and reverent, must be… well… not avoided, but not entirely embraced yet, while there is no problem with going to a loony parish in manifest communion with the local bishop where all manner of soul-annihilating nonsense goes on unchecked. It’s just plain sad, and I hope that this will soon be resolved.

I still will not recommend frequent reception of Holy Communion at an SSPX chapel – yet – unless the conditions of your life are such that it would be very difficult, physically or morally, to get to another church or parish manifestly in union with the local diocese and Rome, even if it isn’t ideal. The obstacles must be serious, but they cannot be easily spelled out because the circumstances of people’s lives differ so much.

So, yes, you fulfill your Sunday Mass obligation at an SSPX chapel and at an Eastern Catholic church.

This question comes up fairly often and it bears review.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, ASK FATHER Question Box, Both Lungs, Canon Law, Our Catholic Identity, SSPX, The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices | Tagged Eastern Catholic Churches, Mass Obligation, SSPX
14 Comments

I reject sexism in every form, and all its pomps, and all its empty works.

Posted on 24 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

At the Fishwrap (aka National Schismatic Reporter) there is an interesting piece by our old pal Phyllis Zagano which merits a little – just a little – attention.

She never misses an opportunity to work in tidbits about the disparity of men’s and women’s presence in leadership roles in the Church, and she got in a dig about deaconettes (her obsession). That said, her main point was about how the Holy See handles communications with the wider world.

I must admit that she got a lot of this right. The Holy See’s communications operation is seriously messed up. I’ll give Phyllis this point. I believe she once worked in communications. But I digress.

Zagano criticized Pope Francis for not naming enough women as consultors to the new Secretariat for Social Communications. Except for the consultors for the CDF, I’m not sure that consultors do very much. Still, how dare Pope Francis not appoint more women!

And then there is the FACT CHECK:

Fact check: it was the deacon Phoebe who carried Paul’s letter to the Romans. In today’s world, that could be called “release of information.”

First, Romans 16:1 doesn’t say that Phoebe carried any letter. Some people – not everyone – extrapolate that she did.

Commendo autem vobis Phoeben sororem nostram, quae est in ministerio ecclesiae, quae est in Cenchris: ut eam suscipiatis in Domino digne sancti: et assistatis ei in quocumque negotio vestri indiguerit : etenim ipsa quoque astitit multis, et mihi ipsi. … And I commend to you Phebe, our sister, who is in the ministry of the church, that is in Cenchrae: That you receive her in the Lord as becometh saints; and that you assist her in whatsoever business she shall have need of you. For she also hath assisted many, and myself also [DR].

It was a commonplace in the ancient world to commend the one who carried the letter. However, the text does not explicitly say that Phoebe carried the letter. There is a strong chance that she did, but this is not in any way clear. Maybe she did, maybe she didn’t. We don’t have to accept this premise.

Furthermore, she wrote:

In today’s world, that could be called “release of information”.

Or, in today’s world, that could be called “carrying a letter”.

In other words, Phoebe was the FedEx guy. Paul didn’t trust the Italian post… or the Vatican post for that matter. Perhaps Card. Burke should have found a “Phoebe” when he sent his books to the members of the Synod of Bishops. They were stolen out of the mail slots, remember? HERE But I digress.

Next, Zagano calls Phoebe a deacon, which is scriptural, but that confuses the issue in the present day debates about ordination of women. It would be better to refer to deaconesses (deaconettes), to distinguish their ministry from that of the ordained, that is, male, ordained (real) deacons.

Then it goes blah blah for a while. But, toward the end, the last few paragraphs…

The question is not so much what is true and what is false, but rather what people perceive as true and what people perceive as false. The first thing that seems “false” is what the church says about women in relation to how it acts toward them. [Isn’t that the same as what is true and what is false? Anyway, if there aren’t enough women in the Secretariat for Social Communication, as consultors mind you, then the Church’s credibility is compromised… for Phyllis. But it gets worse. Her argument is that if there aren’t enough women involved, as consultors, then the Vatican’s message itself is not credible.]

That is the very serious problem the Secretariat for Communication and its units face. [Never mind the meltdown of Vatican Radio, the bizarre content of L’Osservatore Romano, etc. etc. etc.] If the messenger is not to be believed, then what happens to the message? [So… because Phoebe delivered the letter it was somehow credible in a way that it wouldn’t have been had a man carried it.]

You think maybe everybody needs to remember who announced the Resurrection?

Ummm… it was the angel.

In any event, I reject the notion that the Church’s message is not credible simply because men announce it.

I reject this, just as I reject sexism in every form, along with all its pomps and all its empty works.

The moderation queue is ON.

Posted in Deaconettes, Liberals, Lighter fare, The Drill | Tagged deaconesses, deaconettes, Phoebe, Phyllis Zagano, Romans 16, social communications
9 Comments

Are you anxious, upset, confused about the Church today? Wherein Fr. Z rants.

Posted on 24 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

In this time of confusion over doctrine and praxis, many people ask me in email what they can do either to maintain equilibrium, or else to “be the maquis”, as it were, and join the resistance against the liberal undermining of our Catholic cult, code, creed and identity.

Yes, I think that there should be a “resistance”, though not every one can “resist” in the same way.

The first step is, of course, to examine your conscience and GO TO CONFESSION. Only after that can you determine your best course of action.

Some of you must be engaged in this struggle, either because of your ecclesiastical office or because you have the spirit and the firepower upstairs to engage effectively. Some of you might engage on a wider scale, though your immediate concern is for your family and close circle. Some of you must not engage actively because these debates and current news upsets you spiritually and brings only confusion fear and anger to your lives.

You have to figure out on your own who you are, though I’ll remind priests out there that their souls are on the line if they either go the way of undermining cult, code and creed or, tepid, shrink from the line of fire and cower in a hole.

That said, there is one thing that everyone can and should do.

Read, review, study the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

US HERE – UK HERE (There are many editions. Look around.)

I am a huge fan of Kindles (US HERE – UK HERE), but you should also have the BOOK, the material volume which you can hold in your hand and write in. Get the book, which you can flip around in and hold spots in with a couple fingers as you cross check.

Read it. Pick it up. Read portions every day.

St. John Paul II called the CCC, “a sure reference point”.

Ignorance of the content of the Faith, the fides quae creditur, has lead to enormous problems. For one thing, it has turned lots of nominal Catholics into the dupes of liberals who are undermining the Church.

Possession of a copy of the CCC, and a solid familiarity with it, can be both shield and sword in the defense of your Catholic Faith.

Say you are living in the Diocese of Libville, where Most Rev. Fatty McButterpants
has gone off into doctrinal la la land. You are stuck in the burbs and you can’t always drive for two hours with your kids to Tall Tree Circle were Msgr. Zuhlsdorf has the TLM. Instead, you fulfill your Sunday obligation at the clustered, “Engendering Togetherness Community of Welcome” where Fr. Bruce Hugalot is busily churning out self-affirmed pantheists through sketchy preaching and dubious sacraments.

You, on the other hand, have the Catechism of the Catholic Church well in hand.

Ignorance of the Faith makes you a potential victim of the predations of the libs.

Tell me:

What would you think of a school where, in its basic chemistry courses, neither the teacher or the the students learn the Periodic Table of Elements?

What would you think of the school where neither the teachers nor the students in math courses know Multiplication Tables?

Would you go to a doctor who never undertook to learn basic anatomy? A pharmacist who didn’t learn the basics of drug actions and interactions?

How about a barber who can’t cut hair?

Would you hire a plumber who doesn’t own a wrench?

See what I mean?

Another question:

Would you respect any of the above in their fields?

The CCC puts us on a sure footing.

And this is for you libs out there:

If in reading the CCC, you find teachings which you don’t agree with, not just which puzzle you but rather which you truly reject, then there’s the door. G’bye! Extra omnes! Get. Out. There are lots of “faith communities” out there with little or no doctrine where you can be right at home. Go be happy somewhere else and leave us alone.

When you hear from the pulpit or some other place a dubious notion that rings an alarm bell, check your CCC. Then you can decide to ask Bp. McButterpants or Fr. Hugalot what gives. “You said X, but the Catechism says Y. What’s with that?”

That’s not everyone’s role or cuppa, of course. Many people will choose not to engage and, for those many, that’s a good choice. Others, however….

Along with the Catechism of the Catholic Church you can review the always dependable Roman Catechism, the The Roman Catechism: The Catechism of the Council of Trent for Parish Priests. Fathers… note the title. Do you have a copy? You should. You should know this stuff like a mathematician knows his tables. It’s basic. And it’s not optional.

US HERE – UK HERE (There are many editions. Look around.)

Also, make use of volumes of the wonderful Baltimore Catechism, which has different volumes for different ages (US HERE – UK HERE). It’s so useful, in its Q&A format. The Catechism of Pius X is also great. (US HERE – UK HERE). There are many good resources available.

However, make sure you have the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Some might say that the older the better. Fine. But if you are in a “dialogue” with Just-Call-Me “Bruce”, you need the current official Catechism of the Catholic Church. If “Bruce” objects to anything in it, he’s toast… and he knows it, too, deep down.

Fathers, don’t be a plumber without a wrench.

Consider making an entire year of preaching based on the Catechism. Go through it portion by portion, perhaps also with a weekly parish inquiry class on its content which capable lay people might help to run.

GET THE BOOK!

Do you have the book?

READ THE BOOK!

Thus endeth the rant.

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, "How To..." - Practical Notes, ACTION ITEM!, Be The Maquis, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liberals, New Evangelization, Our Catholic Identity, The Coming Storm, The future and our choices, Wherein Fr. Z Rants | Tagged Baltimore Catechism, Catechism of the Catholic Church, Roman Catechism
35 Comments

Your Sunday Sermon Notes

Posted on 23 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Was there a good point in the sermon you heard for your Mass of Sunday obligation?

Let us know.

I was deacon for a TLM Solemn today, so I didn’t preach at that Mass, but I took the next Mass, too, NO. Jumping off from the Gospel, I spoke about the magnificent bodies we will have in the resurrection. Christ showed us something of what they will be like, with their characteristics of brightness, agility, subtlety, and impassibility.

Considering what awaits us in the joy of heaven, where Christ will share something of His transforming glory with us, why would we sin and lose what He has won?

And yet we do.

What a merciful Savior we have, who saved us once, and saves us again and again for all time.

Posted in Liturgy Science Theatre 3000 |
18 Comments

23 April is “Talk Like Shakespeare Day”! Newly discovered act of a rare play….

Posted on 23 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

After Masses this morning, TLM and NO, I had lunch and nap.

I awoke with a start.

Today, I suddenly realized, is…

TALK LIKE SHAKESPEARE DAY!

Yes, it is the birthday of the Bard.

In the past I have encouraged you to talk like Shakespeare.

To help you, I have offered videos and some suggestive words. I hope you remember them.

I also, to enkindle in you a true zeal for this moment – which can spill over into tomorrow because, hey, why not? – I even posted a scene from a little known play called… A Most Tragikal Hystory of Obama I

I found another little known piece (I dashed off) which might bring you to beg the Muse for … the… thing muses give.

The Trumping of the Shrew

Dramatis personae:
Chorus
Lord Trump: President of these USA
Lord Sean: Baron of Spicer – Secretary of Press
Lord Bannon: Earl of Breitbart – Counselor
CNN
New York Times
Lord Sessions – Attorney General
Hillary Clinton
MSNBC
Crowd – Outside

CHORUS:
O for a network pundit that would salve
the anxious outcome of elections tense,
a stage for wonk debates, senators to prate,
and congressmen to guide th’ electorate.
So has the ruddy Donald, hair swept up,
defied th’ establishment and, in his wake,
has claimants one by one discomfited,
brought down in vanquishment and loss.
But pardon, sponsors all, for we halt now
your pandering for sales with this stock gang
of mainsteam media elites, who press
in conference for POTUS now to hear.
List! List! O list if ever you
did county love and office high respect.
For Donald, hair in place, has enteréd
a statement now to make, with many quips
to batter newsies where they stand or sit,
because their daily coverage is for….

[TRUMP-ETS. ENTER Trump, Sean, Bannon, retainers]

SEAN:
Hail now the coming of himself. All rise.
Honor now to POTUS Donald raise.

TRUMP:
All during our campaign, you leeches fleered
and hooted high whenever I foretold
that we would sweep our states with style
and with our college electoral take the crown.
No no, you clowns with twisted news and fake,
conspired our ascendancy to break.
Thus speak I now. I, not you, was right.
And you were wrong our victory to scorn.
But it was huge, huge I say and great.
Safe, strong and fair America shall be
again, believe me, I can tell you that.

SPICER:
Vultures, do your best the President
to harm, his every word to twist and wrench.
The Donald will your hollow questions take.

TRUMP:
I see one there, of lefty CNN
e’er in the sack with foe homonymous.

CNN:
O POTUS, smug and with thy mane o’er thrust,
when during months campaigning, with your sneer
thou didst make sundry vows and promises.
Of taxes you said plenty. Where’s the beef?
And rampaged you against the thrifty care
which blessed Obama graciously did grant
to all the poor, his name forever blessed.
The wall you called for with your rabid mass
of devotees deluded’s still not up.
Now what? What now, o promiser in chief?
Cans’t show us ought as token of success
in this centenary of days primordial?

[CROWDS OUTSIDE]
Build the Wall! Build the Wall!
Mexico shall pay withal!

TRUMP:
A beaut’, thou art, sirrah, a real beaut’.
Did e’er your channel, bewizzened and beguiled,
you commie, tree-enamored blatteroons,
attention lend to facts and state them fair?
Fake! Fake, your news. Forsooth, it’s fake!
Believe me, I can tell you that, again.
In governing, the waste and taxes swoll’n
shall be laid low in blesséd sweet relief
of fardels foisted on the working man
by dems, known otherwise as losers all.
Renew we now our oft-repeated pledge.
Again America renewed shall be
and great and safe and strong. Believe you me!

SPICER:
In nebulosity sulphuric there
I spy a lady frantic, gray and shrunk,
mad to retrace her halcyon steps when she
did once o’er-awe the inky media.
Let next Hell’s Bible query POTUS here
for our amusement and their termless shame.

NYT:
Mister President – O how that word
does stick as if it were a sharpened bone
or twig or any other sort of thing
with points and jags and cuts and stings and … points –
O would that I could point and jag and sting
with cutting prose and jabbing stinging … points
and … but… Deny this, in a rush
of phrases known by now by everyone so well!
It’s true for sure that you and yours, by which
I mean your evil clutch of Breitbart serfs,
your hireling attendants such as that
retainer there, are in the Russians’ pay
and are so compromised, that every course
homey and domestic is bewitched.
Tell, O POTUS, tell! Cans’t thou be true?

TRUMP:
See? See? This is what I mean.
The times of Knickerbocker fame have past.
They scrape and con, subscribers to elate,
and tired old subscriptions to retain.
No way did Vlad extend in cyberplots
dread influence forth to local, and to state
or federal contests, safe and e’er secure.
Why waste we now our time on this old times,
whose time is past, whose readership is few?
If Russian stories you would seek, then go,
alacritous to Chappaqua thee hie.
Of Hillary there ask, or ask her vile
ensconcéd servers, though in fostering
these questions thou mays’t accidently die
and wind up in some park against a tree.
Now go. Ask not thou Roosky chat from me.
Seek sordid Bill and worsted Hillary.

[CROWDS OUTSIDE]
Lock her up! Lock her up!

BANNON:
Good my liege and POTUS, stay and hear
while news I bring to presidential ear.
Foreseeing that the MSM would dote
upon the Clintons, facts ignoring all,
the senior staff of this thy snowy house
surprise has sorted, documents made out
so that, indicted, seized and brought to town,
judicial process and the FBI
at long last might sift Hillary anew.
And though the MSM shall take the part
of Alekto, shall Tisiphone’s play out,
be they Magaera in the flesh, we shall
in equity remain, and blameless cool,
irenic ever to their Erinyes.

SPICER [Aside]:
Not.

TRUMP:
Well and fairly explainest thou thyself,
believe me, I will tell you by and by,
O counsel bearing Bannon, trusted aide.
But, speak now, hide this not from POTUS eyes.
Now tell us in the press room here before
the present MSM, agog – what beauts!
Reveal! What’s in this wondrous cheery tale
you hinted at of portents unforeseen?

SPICER:
With keen juridic Sessions, comes she now.
It’s presaged by that clanking in the hall.

[ENTER HILLARY in chains, AG SESSIONS and DORYPHORE AGENTS]

PRESS, ALL:
Woe! Woe! And more woe!

[CROWDS OUTSIDE]
Lock her up! Lock her up!

TRUMP:
What’s this ghost-like image I descry?

HILLARY:
Oooooooo…..

TRUMP:
O wrinkléd one.

HILLARY:
Eeeeeeeee….

SPICER:
Gentlemen and ladies of the press,
you know the former lady of his place.
First lady of the land as once she was
she stands now neither lady nor the first.
In second place defeated came she in,
though you, the MSM, did long e’re since
bedeck her with your plaudits, laurels raw.
You simpered, fawning, supine, biased all,
sycophantic toadies that you are.

[CROWDS OUTSIDE]
Lock her up! Lock her up!

TRUMP:
Sweet music. Sweet days.
Silence, now, and let her have her say,
[ASIDE to AG]
but guard thine ears from poison that she’ll spray.

HILLARY:
Thus did I ever make this land my purse.
For mine own slaves made I these media fools.
For this great office did I time expend,
deserving, righteous, due and next in line
to take and hold for always what is mine.
Mine. Mine it is! Taken, precious, lost.
Soros rich, and MSM besides
could not conspire to bring me to my prize.
Alinsky tactical, dread Satan’s champ,
provided me with playbook thick with scams.
As chief among Obama’s diplomats
I, myself the law, did smile at regs
made for the lesser beings, for their rule,
while we, th’ enlightened, dictated and fleeced
the man forgotten, simple, dim and slow.
Though heavy hang these chains in place of crowns,
again name I the morons who opposed
me bigots, racists, homophobic dolts.
Your heads deplorable shall fall into
the teaming baskets fit for xenophobes.
As for the forty and the fourth in line
of oval office yon, I hate the moor,
who lent not pardon when my hopes were rent
and to the White House Donald Trump was sent.

CNN:
O piteous spectacle!

NYT:
O woeful day!

TRUMP:
Didn’t I say it? Did I it not say?
In penultimate debate I made it clear
that, when this lofty office I did claim
we’d find, o fibber, emails erased.
Quoth I before the biased MSM
my general attorney to engage
to ferret out the truth behind thy lies
and see that justice in this land be done.
And to my promises I shall be true.
As never knew the Attic denizens,
who raiséd up stout wooden parapets
‘gainst the Spartans grim, shall our wall be.
The Roman, close to courses mine on heaths
of golfy Scotland palisades did frame
Hadrianatical. Nor Gobi dry,
nor Beijing smoggy saw our ramparts high,
high, lofty strong and unafraid.
For in that wall towards welcome guests arrived
there op’s a comprehensive door,
a door, believe me, op’ed to lawful path.
Against all hombres peccant, dudes corrupt,
I can tell you, this wall will be sealéd.
Seal’d, that is, not op’ed. And that’s for you,
you fake news types who haven’t got a clue.

[CROWDS OUTSIDE]
Build the Wall! Build the Wall!
Mexico shall pay withal!

HILLARY:
Eeeeeeeeee….!

CNN, NYT
Woe, woe and thrice woe.

TRUMP:
We are going to work to make a land
once known for justice, pow’r, wealth and hope,
which enemies abroad and here do hate,
become again America the Great!

[CROWDS OUTSIDE]
USA! USA!

TRUMP:
Sessions, good my lord, Enforcer Prime,
take ye now this baggage hence and hie
unto the Tower grim, her trial to hold,
her sentence to attend and prison taste.
Let thoughts of laws long-scorned race though her brain
as sparks of conscious lightning might old ash
fire into humble penance and respect.
If indeed, as she lamented now,
the lack of pardon from the forty-fourth,
the forty-fifth, who weighs and wields right now
prerogative benign, may issue forth
mild pardons and his commutations kind.
It will be huge. Believe. ‘Tis truth I tell.
But now, to Mar-A-Lago let us go.
A Baron does await our presence there
with true Melania, and Ivanka fair,
dear siblings and the rest. Come, let us go.

[TRUMP-ETS – EXIT TRUMP, BANNON, SESSIONS, AGENTS, and HILLARY, clanking]

SPICER:
What say you, newsies? Agents of fake news?
What say you in the wake of these events?
What shall your carrion messages convey,
to trouble all our homeland, free and brave?

CNN, NYT:
Revenge! About! Seek! Burn! Fire! Kill! Slay!

MSNBC:
To Berkeley!

[EXEUNT OMNES]

Posted in Lighter fare | Tagged Talk Like Shakespeare Day
15 Comments

Fr. Murray, Prof. Royal on “Deaconettes”, ‘Amoris laetitia’, Liturgy, Communion in the hand

Posted on 22 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

My good friend Fr. Murray was on EWTN the other day along with Prof. Robert Royal.

Outstanding.

They react to Card. Sarah, Bp. Morlino, Thomas Reese, SJ, James Martin, SJ, Card. Schoenborn, etc.

Oh boy!

Speaking of JESUITS… HERE

Posted in The Drill | Tagged Amoris Laetitia, Bp. Morlino, deaconesses, deaconettes, Fr. Gerald Murray, Robert Royal
25 Comments

AUDIO – Victimae Paschali Laudes – As you may never have heard it before

Posted on 22 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

20 April 2017 was the 10th anniversary of the death of Msgr Richard Schuler. A great deal as been written about him and we all owe a debt of gratitude to him for what he did.

In his memory, and to respond to the many requests I received about a piece I used in one of my podcasts for the Easter Octave, here is the rendition of Victimae Paschali Laudes by Pietro Yon which parishioners of St. Agnes in St. Paul have now heard for decades, during the pastorate of Msgr. Schuler (the conductor of the choir and orchestra) and under his successors.

Yes, this can be done in a parish. Not every parish, mind you. But, yes, in a parish.

First, listen to the Sequence as sung by the St. Agnes Schola Cantorum and, especially, the Chorale (I was in both these recordings lo those many years ago).

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: RSS

Posted in Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged Msgr. Richard Schuler, Pietro Yon, St. Agnes, Victimae paschali laudes
5 Comments

Books For Seminarians Project – COMPLETED!

Posted on 22 April 2017 by Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

I posted HERE about this year’s project to give a great book to all the seminarians of the Diocese of Madison, shepherded by the Extraordinary Ordinary, Most Reverend Robert C. Morlino. At that post, I have some blunt things to say about the state of the Church.

I also described in that post what I think Pope Francis might be up to.

In any event, this year’s choice for the seminarians is a terrific new book by Australian theologian Tracey Rowland, Catholic Theology.

US HERE – UK HERE