How tiny liberal loon crank groups provide cover and distraction for larger, more dangerous initiatives.

In Religion Dispatches which is associated with USC, Patricia Miller opines.

Who is Patricia Miller? She is described on the page:

Patricia Miller is the author of Good Catholics: The Battle Over Abortion in the Catholic Church. She has written extensively about the intersection of politics, sex and religion. She was the editor of Conscience magazine, the leading journal of pro-choice Catholic thought, and the editor-in-chief of National Journal’s daily health care briefings.

“Leading”?  According to… themselves?

So, Patricia Miller is an open, abortion promoter.  There is also a Sr. Patricia Miller, SSND.  I think they may be the same person.  Someone, please correct me if I am wrong.

Miller has rushed to trumpet a statement of some nuns in support of the ObamaCare pro-contraception, pro-abortion mandate being imposed by the government contrary to the 1st Amendment.

The group of nuns, the National Coalition of American Nuns, is even more openly dissident than the LCWR.  It is a tiny group that openly advertises the Womens Ordination Conference, Call To Action, Future Church, the National catholic Reporter … you get the idea.  They are openly what the LCWR would like to be openly.  However, it seems that their website has not been updated since 2009.  Some signers of a letter they sent to the Holy See include Joan Chittister, OSB, Jeannine Gramick, SL, Theresa Kane, RSM, Donna Quinn, OP.  Still, it seems that this is a tiny group of the more radicalized.

In short, this is an insignificant group of cranks on the farthest fringe of the liberal dissident nun phenomenon.

Therefore, Patricia Miller writes about it as it were highly significant, from her expert point of view.

Catholic Nuns Back Obamacare Contraception Access

The National Coalition of American Nuns has announced their support for women’s right to access contraceptives under the Affordable Care Act as the Supreme Court prepares to hear the historic Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood cases. [So, what?  I today announce my support for the Cubs right to win the World Series.  Hear that, everyone?  Make it happen!] While the plaintiffs in these cases are Mennonites and evangelical Christians, opposition to the contraceptive mandate was largely spearheaded by the Catholic bishops. [For people like the writer and the crank group in question, the bishops are the Bad Guys.  Remember, if the LCWR is the main exponent of the Magisterium of Nuns, these are the wannabes waaaaay out on the fringe.] Several key cases of Catholic non-profits, such as the Little Sisters of the Poor, are making their way through the lower courts and may well end up in the Supreme Court themselves. [For the group in question, and the writer, the Little Sisters of the Poor are also The Bad Guys.]

NCAN is dismayed that the Little Sisters of the Poor, [See?] the University of Notre Dame and other Catholic organizations are challenging the Affordable Care Act. Spurred on by the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops these organizations are attempting to hold hostage all women by refusing insurance to them for contraceptives,” said the 2,000-member group in a statement.

“This has gotten out of hand,” Sister Donna Quinn, head of NCAN, told RD. [Remember Donna Quinn?  I refer you to my infamous post called Nuns Gone Wild! Sr. Donna Quinn, of the Sinsinawa Domincans in Wisconsin, has escorted women to abortion clinics in the Chicago area so they could abort their babies safe from pro-life protesters. ] “It isn’t ‘faith and freedom’ when reproductive autonomy isn’t extended by the Catholic Church to women. Now we have other Christian religions seeing what the bishops are doing and saying we will do likewise. It isn’t freedom when a woman can be held hostage by the owner of a business.”  [It is hard to find words to describe how stupid that argument is.]

The nuns are seeking support for their stand through an online petition. The Rev. Debra Haffner of the Religious Institute [more on her HERE. She is a “sexologist and ordained Unitarian Universalist minister”.  Whoohoo!  What else has she accomplished?  “Prior to founding the Religious Institute and entering ministry, Haffner was President and Chief Executive Officer of SIECUS, the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (1988-2000), Director of Information and Education for the Center for Population Options,[5] Director of Community Services and Public Relations, Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington.[6] She has also worked at the Bureau of Community Health Services at the U.S. Public Health Service, and at The Population Institute.”  Get the idea?   Reading her background brought the word “eugenics” to mind. More HERE.] is helping NCAN coordinate the effort. “When I saw the brave stand these nuns were taking on the mandate, I started to think about what we could do to amplify their voices. So we launched a social media campaign asking people to ‘Stand with the Nuns’,” she said. [Remember all the catholics who jump onto the “stand with the nuns” rhetoric when nuns – whichever – back obviously liberal and obviously dissident causes, especially against the bishops (read: Magisterium of Nuns).]

We really need to counter the idea that faith is opposed to family planning,” said Haffner, [What she really means is “contraception and abortion”.] who’s also helping to coordinate a Faith Rally at the Supreme Court on March 25, the day of the oral arguments for the mandate challenges. “All too often the media only shows a Catholic bishop to offer the faith perspective. More than 14 major religious denominations have statements supporting birth control and birth control access. People need to understand that this is not only an affront to women’s moral agency but opens the door to denying a whole range of services, from other kinds of reproductive health care to services to LGBT people,” she said.  [So, this whole thing is a ploy to grab a little attention.]

NCAN has a long history of reproductive justice and Catholic reform activism. Quinn has volunteered as an abortion clinic escort [Good grief.  They are even openly proud of that.] and was one of the leaders of a delegation of women religious to Rome 1994 to hold a parallel discussion about the role of women religious during the bishops’ synod on religious life, which largely excluded women.

Liberals have coalitions of myriad groups, many fronts for other, much larger groups.  The small groups provide cover and distraction for what the larger groups are really up to.  This is a common feature of the Left’s activity.  They work together, cover each other’s tracks, carry each other’s water, present a united front.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Liberals, Sin That Cries To Heaven, The Drill | Tagged , , , , , , , ,
33 Comments

ASK FATHER: Why is the back of Father’s vestment raised at the consecration?

From a reader…

QUAERITUR:

I have been wondering why the servers lift the priest’s chasuble during the consecration. From the sources that I could find, it was an old practice to help the priest because the chasubles were heavy. Is there a deeper or symbolic meaning to the action?

The practical answer is the best answer.  Vestments of yore were fuller, draping lots of material over the arms, which could sometimes be heavy.  The weight of vestments were increased by ornamentation.  At the consecration, the edge of the the chasuble would be raised to assist the priest or bishop in raising his arms.

Raising the edge of a vestment, like a cope or chasuble, or – now that I am thinking about it – even lifting the hem of the celebrant’s alb have a real, practical purpose.

Don’t laugh.  Women would spend years making beautiful lace for albs out of their love for the Lord, because Holy Mass was the center of their lives.  Then some priest puts his foot through it.  I have seen that happen.  I was in choir once, watching as a know-it-all priest, whose half-baked partial knowledge of what to do inspired him in false know-it-all-ism to refuse to allow the deacon to lift the alb away from his foot.  Fr. Smarticus Pantsicus promptly put his foot through the beautiful lace.  Thus, he nearly ruined a someone else’s alb. high enough so that they could see the Host and chalice (as per the rubrics).  The same applied while the celebrant was incensing the altar and other things.  Copes were held up and away so that the priest can move.  The lower hem of albs were held up as priests ascended the stairs, lest he trip or, worse, put his foot through the precious handmade lace.

So… Fr. Smartici Pantsici out there… when it is time for the servers to help you, shut the hell up and let yourself be helped!

Gestures also take on symbolic meanings over time. Sometimes you might hear that this physical contact with the eminently priestly vestment associates the server more closely with the priest.  Sure.  That’s works for me too.

I’ll conclude with this.

Servers, go ahead and lift the edge of that chasuble…. BUT… just a little, okay?  Don’t lift it too high. Just a little, okay?  You don’t have to lift it half way up Father’s back.  Less is more, alright?  This especially applies with the more modern Roman vestments which don’t impede the arms and aren’t very heavy.

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

Lent, Gator Meat, and You… and I

In this week’s digital edition of the UK’s best Catholic weekly, The Catholic Herald, I saw this cartoon:

Not a lot of gators in Ol’ Blighty, except perhaps plodding around in the offices of The Bitter Pill, but I think we are having an impact.

Naturally, you will recall our discussions of this HERE.  You may eat alligator on Fridays in Lent.

But recently in Natchitoches (aka “Nakatish”) I was delighted to have my Lenten lizard.  Not in burger form, but in noshable chunks with what was described to me as “red gravy”.

20140315-111713.jpg

UPDATE:

For after Lent, how about some nice Gator Gummy Candies?

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Fr. Z's Kitchen, Lighter fare, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , ,
19 Comments

My View For Awhile: home again edition

Having sampled “Nakatish” Meat Pies, and having jawed endlessly with clerics, and having delivered talks and having mactated the Victim in a solemn manner, I head home to a colder clime.

20140314-185646.jpg

My thanks to the nice people I met in Natchitoches.

Posted in On the road, What Fr. Z is up to | Tagged
7 Comments

“In varietate concordia”, E pluribus unum” and “In necessariis unitas”

In the slimy, slithery scrawl of the head of catholics for Choice to Hell’s Bible (aka The New York Times – HERE) cites a Latin phrase “in varietate concordia” which he renders as “unity in diversity.”

What the writer, dissident Jon O’Brien, doesn’t tell you is that in varietate concordia is the motto of the European Union.

Quite a different concept than that expressed in the secular “e pluribus unum“.  The former implies conformity.

The European Union renders the Latin as “United in Diversity”, which has its origins as a Communist slogan from the 1960’s to 80’s to reconcile differences within European Communism as the Soviet Bloc became shaky.

It doesn’t surprise me that this faux-catholic, Soros-funded pro-abortion disaster of an organization would revel in a Communist slogan.

But that is not the real point of this post.

The phrase in varietate concordia, reminded me of the old chestnut sometimes attributed, incorrectly, to St. Augustine of Hippo: In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas.  I wrote about this phrase years ago, HERE.

At that time, 2006, I pointed out that the phrase appeared in a 1959 encyclical of Pope John XXIII entitled Ad Petri cathedramHERE.

Then I pointed out that it seemed to appear for the first time in Germany, in 1627 and 1628, among peaceful divines of the Lutheran and German Reformed churches, and found a hearty welcome among moderate divines In England, and that its authorship had been traced to Rupertus Meldinus.

I received an email with more information:

The information you post there is out of date, given that in 1999 a Dutch scholar named H. J. M. Nellen stumbled on the phrase in a 1617 work by the renegade Catholic bishop De Dominis.

He referred me HERE.

This informs us that the an apostate catholic bishop, Marco Antonio De Dominis, used it in a work in 1617 in De republica ecclesiastica libri X, London/Hannover 1617-1622) “on p. 676 of the first volume published in London in 1617, at the end of chapter 8 of book 4, which treats of the papacy” (H. J. M. Nellen, “De zinspreuk ‘In necessariis unitas, in non necessariis libertas, in utrisque caritas,'” Nederlands archief voor kerkgeschidenis 79, no. 1 (1999): 106, 104 (99-106)).  Cf. HERE.

In any event, it is also hard to have a lot of pride in the origin of this phrase.

Posted in "How To..." - Practical Notes, Linking Back, The Drill | Tagged
3 Comments

‘c’atholics for Choice and Can. 915

The head of the faux-catholic, pro-abortion, Soros-funded “Catholics for Choice”, Jon O’Brien, ought to be publicly corrected by our bishops in these USA and then denied Holy Communion according to can. 915 until he publicly recant his spiritually dangerous positions.

His recent letter to the New York Times (Hell’s Bible) contains a falsehood.

The Opinion Pages|LETTERS

Being a Catholic in the Time of Francis

To the Editor:

Peter Manseau raises several important issues in “What It Means to Be Catholic Now” (Op-Ed, March 10), not least the question “Who is a Catholic?” Catholicism has long been defined by the Latin phrase “in varietate concordia” — “unity in diversity.”

All Catholics are connected by the requirement to follow our consciences as the ultimate arbiter when it comes to moral decision-making. That leads many of us to disagree with our bishops while still retaining our Catholicism. [I am sure you readers see what is wrong with this.  Catholics must form their consciences according to the mind of the Church and, even when they struggle to understand and grasp the Church’s difficult teachings, they must accede to what the Church teaches.]

There are no political benchmarks, attendance records or litmus tests for being a Catholic. We are Catholic because of our baptism, and nothing can ever change that.

JON O’BRIEN
President, Catholics for Choice
Washington, March 10, 2014

This is a purposely misleading statement.   It calls for a correction.

Posted in 1983 CIC can. 915, Emanations from Penumbras, Francis, Liberals, Our Catholic Identity, Sin That Cries To Heaven, The Drill | Tagged , ,
34 Comments

Bp. Egan (D. Portsmouth): denial of Communion can be act of mercy, love

It is time for happy and articulate culture warriors to rise up and speak out.

The Bishop of Portsmouth, England, Most Reverend Philip Egan, explained clearly what every bishop and priest ought to be able to repeat in public with sincere charity for their deeply confused and demoralized flocks.

If you vote in favor of or support redefinition of marriage to include same-sex unions, you should extract yourself from the Communion line and not receive.  If you are support pro-abortion laws and the politicians who make them, you should not go forward for Communion.  If you are a widely recognized public figure and you support things that are contrary to nature and to the Church’s clear teachings, then pastors of souls should help you, in charity, to see your error and, while protecting the flock from your scandalous bad example, deny you Holy Communion.

From Life News:

UK bishop: Denying Communion to anti-life/family politicians is ‘an act of mercy’

PORTSMOUTH, England, March 13, 2014 (LifeSiteNews.com) – “When people are not in communion with the Catholic Church on such a central thing as the value of life of the unborn child and also in terms of the teachings of the church on marriage and family life – they are voting in favor of same-sex marriage – then they shouldn’t be receiving Holy Communion,” said Portsmouth Bishop Philip Egan in a wide-ranging on-camera interview with LifeSiteNews last week.

Bishop Egan explained that rather than a punitive measure, the denial of Holy Communion is “always an act of mercy.” It is done, he said, “with the hope and prayer that that person can be wooed back into full communion with the Church.”

Nobody is forced to be Catholic. We’re called by Christ and He’s chosen us, it’s a free choice. We live under the word of God. It’s not my truth, its God’s truth,” he said. [As it has been said, I am just the mailman.  I don’t get to edit the mail.]

“One would hope that in that case it would encourage someone to come back to seek communion with the Lord with the truth and say I’m sorry I got lost.”

The difficulties faced by Catholics and other Christians in an increasingly secular and intolerant Britain are keenly felt. Bishop Egan has been outspoken in his defence of life and family, writing to the Prime Minister and speaking eloquently on the issues. He has himself experienced backlash both in terms of “unpleasant correspondence” and even a confrontation at the Cathedral.

For him, however, the duty to witness to the truth in love is not an option despite the persecutions that may come. [And they will come!] Christians, he says, “are bound to come into conflict” with the secularized culture. [It has ever been so.]

We must not go looking for a fight, “but we will, being Christian, have to suffer, and have to go to the cross,” he said. “This is one of the ways, particularly as a priest or a bishop, in which that cross is going to come out, because you have to witness to the truth.”

[…]

Read the rest there.

Fr Z kudos for Bp. Egan.

Posted in Fr. Z KUDOS, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice | Tagged , , ,
38 Comments

Will reaffirmation of teaching on divorce and Communion be ignored?

At his fine canon law blog, canonist Ed Peters, sober, offers a rather scary view of a scary trend.  He has no combox over there.

Why the gathering storm over divorce might be worse than was that over contraception

Interesting parallels are being suggested between, on the one hand, Paul VI’s dithering over contraception in the 1960s (which, though reversed by his reassertion of Church teaching in Humanae vitae, contributed to widespread repudiation of that teaching by Catholics), and Francis’ recent mixed signals (or what are widely perceived as mixed signals) over the future of Church teaching against divorce-and-remarriage and the reception of holy Communion. Notwithstanding some important differences between the two men and situations, I write to suggest that the stakes for all might actually be higher this time around.

Consider two points:

First, Church teaching against contraception had to be teased out over the centuries from natural law theory and what we call now ‘theology of the body’. It rests today largely on conclusions of logic, philosophy, and theology. Church teaching against divorce-and-remarriage, in contrast, is expressly proclaimed in the New Testament and any literate Catholic can read Jesus’ strong words about it in the Bible. This teaching was heatedly and repeatedly defended by the Church Fathers, was reiterated consistently in numerous Councils, and has been expounded by all major theologians.

Second, short of personal admission, there is no way to tell whether this Catholic couple or that is practicing contraception, and so there are virtually no ecclesiastical consequences possible in the external forum for disregard of Church teaching by pew Catholics. Indeed, with exceptions too rare to mention, there weren’t even official consequences for high-profile Catholics defending contraception in the ’60s. But cohabitation and post-divorce ‘marriage’, in contrast, are public acts falling squarely with the parameters of well-established (if inconsistently applied) public consequences (withholding of Communion being the best known). Millions of Catholics abide by this consequence. The millions of others who do not abide by it pretty much know they do not.

What does this mean?

It means, I suggest, that the complexity of the arguments underlying Church teaching on contraception allowed for the ecclesial equivalent of “plausible deniability” in regard to acceptance of that teaching by rank-and-file faithful, and the nature of the contraceptive act virtually excluded public enforcement measures. [NB:] But Church teaching against divorce-and-remarriage is utterly obvious to any but the deliberately blind and the appropriateness of public consequences for public violation of that teaching has been unanimously upheld, and usually observed, for two millenia. Those factors combine to imply, I think, higher stakes in the divorce debate today than those confronting the Church over contraception a generation ago. [Couple all that with today’s increasing antinomian spirit and plummeting ability to think clearly.]

Now I think Church teaching against divorce-and-remarriage will, in the end, be squarely upheld in principle. My concern is different: what if Church teaching is duly upheld but, as happened after Humanae vitae, that teaching is allowed to twist slowly in the wind? For ecclesiastical officialdom to look the other way on contraception was, in a sense, possible; [Because of its more hidden, private nature.] but for it to do so in regard to divorce, remarriage, and the reception of holy Communion would be immediately recognized as the practical abandonment of a major doctrino-disciplinary point.

Posted in One Man & One Woman, Our Catholic Identity, The Drill | Tagged , , ,
44 Comments

A deacon’s blog suppressed

I want everyone to know about this.

This was posted at the blog Protect The Pope, which was run by Deacon Nick Donnelly.

Diocese of Lancaster’s statement about Deacon Nick Donnelly
BY M DONNELLY, ON MARCH 13TH, 2014
The Bishop’s office of the Diocese of Lancaster has kindly sent Nick the statement they issued to the press about him and Protect the Pope which is copied below.

“After learning that a notice had been placed upon the Protect the Pope website on 7 March saying: ‘Deacon Nick stands down from Protect the Pope for a period of prayer and reflection’ the Bishop’s Office at the Diocese of Lancaster was able to confirm that Bishop Campbell had recently requested Deacon Nick Donnelly to voluntarily pause from placing new posts on the Protect the Pope site.

Meanwhile, it was also confirmed that the Bishop asked Deacon Nick to use this pause to enter into a period of prayer and reflection on the duties involved for ordained bloggers/website administrators to truth, charity and unity in the Church.

Deacon Nick has agreed to the Bishop’s request at this time”.

I, for one, can imagine that a lot of pressure was exerted on the Bishop of Lancaster to have gone to such an extreme as to command a cleric under his charge not to think aloud in public.

I see now, however, that “M Donnelly” is posting at the blog. I take it that this is Missus Deacon. Good for her.

Go get ’em.

In the meantime, every click HERE to visit their blog and to give them a spike in stats.

Posted in The Drill | Tagged , , ,
50 Comments

For the New Evangelization: New Altar Rails!

I have written of Fr. Richard Heilman and the adjustments he is making to the sacred liturgical worship in his parish of St. Mary in Pine Bluff.

Remember how he hauled the table altar out of church and switched entirely to ad orientem worship?

Next?

He has installed an altar rail.

¡Vaya lío!

Check out the ad for rosaries on the sidebar.

Posted in ¡Hagan lío!, "How To..." - Practical Notes, Be The Maquis, Brick by Brick, Hard-Identity Catholicism, Liturgy Science Theatre 3000, Mail from priests, Our Catholic Identity | Tagged , ,
44 Comments