The statement, "Catholics in Political Life," says pro-abortion politicians should not be honored by Catholic communities and institutions. "They should not be given awards, honors or platforms which would suggest support for their actions," says the statement.LifeSiteNews' take on the matter.
However , the interpretation of not giving ‘platforms’ to pro-abortion politicians seems to be weakening. “McCarrick said he will argue that politicians who disagree with church teachings should be allowed to speak at Catholic colleges but should not receive honorary degrees,” reports the Globe.
Saturday, March 05, 2005
Cardinal Would Allow Pro-Abortion Politicians to Speak. Would He Allow White Supremacists?
Gospel for Saturday, 3rd Week of Lent
Luke 18:9-14
Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector
[9] He (Jesus) also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others: [10] "Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. [11] The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, `God, I thank Thee that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. [12] I fast twice a week, I give tithes of all that I get.' [13] But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to Heaven, but beat his breast, saying, `God, be merciful to me a sinner!' [14] I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for every one who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted."
********************
Commentary:
9-14. Our Lord here rounds off His teaching on prayer. In addition to being persevering and full of faith, prayer must flow from a humble heart, a heart that repents of its sins: "Cor contritum et humiliatum, Deus, non despicies" (Psalm 51:19); the Lord, who never despises a contrite and humble heart, resists the proud and gives His grace to the humble (cf. Peter 5:5; James 4:6).
The parable presents two opposite types--the Pharisee, who is so meticulous about external fulfillment of the Law; and the tax collector, who in fact is looked on as a public sinner (cf. Luke 19:7). The Pharisee's prayer is not pleasing to God, because his pride causes him to be self-centered and to despise others. He begins by giving thanks to God, but obviously it is not true gratitude, because he boasts about all the good he has done and he fails to recognize his sins; since he regards himself as righteous, he has no need of pardon, he thinks; and he remains in his sinful state; to him also apply these words spoken by our Lord to a group of Pharisees on another occasion: "If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, `We see,' your guilt remains" (John 9:41). The Pharisee went down from the temple, therefore, unjustified.
But the tax collector recognizes his personal unworthiness and is sincerely sorry for his sins: he has the necessary dispositions for God to pardon him. His ejaculatory prayer wins God's forgiveness: "It is not without reason that some have said that prayer justifies; for repentant prayer or supplicant repentance, raising up the soul to God and re-uniting it to His goodness, without doubt obtains pardon in virtue of the holy love which gives it this sacred movement. And therefore we ought all to have very many such ejaculatory prayers, said as an act of loving repentance and with a desire of obtaining reconciliation with God, so that by thus laying our tribulation before our Savior, we may pour out our souls before and within His pitiful heart, which will receive them with mercy" (St. Francis de Sales, "Treatise on the Love of God", Book 2, Chapter 20).
***************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Parable of the Pharisee and the Tax Collector
[9] He (Jesus) also told this parable to some who trusted in themselves that they were righteous and despised others: [10] "Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. [11] The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, `God, I thank Thee that I am not like other men, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. [12] I fast twice a week, I give tithes of all that I get.' [13] But the tax collector, standing far off, would not even lift up his eyes to Heaven, but beat his breast, saying, `God, be merciful to me a sinner!' [14] I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for every one who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted."
********************
Commentary:
9-14. Our Lord here rounds off His teaching on prayer. In addition to being persevering and full of faith, prayer must flow from a humble heart, a heart that repents of its sins: "Cor contritum et humiliatum, Deus, non despicies" (Psalm 51:19); the Lord, who never despises a contrite and humble heart, resists the proud and gives His grace to the humble (cf. Peter 5:5; James 4:6).
The parable presents two opposite types--the Pharisee, who is so meticulous about external fulfillment of the Law; and the tax collector, who in fact is looked on as a public sinner (cf. Luke 19:7). The Pharisee's prayer is not pleasing to God, because his pride causes him to be self-centered and to despise others. He begins by giving thanks to God, but obviously it is not true gratitude, because he boasts about all the good he has done and he fails to recognize his sins; since he regards himself as righteous, he has no need of pardon, he thinks; and he remains in his sinful state; to him also apply these words spoken by our Lord to a group of Pharisees on another occasion: "If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, `We see,' your guilt remains" (John 9:41). The Pharisee went down from the temple, therefore, unjustified.
But the tax collector recognizes his personal unworthiness and is sincerely sorry for his sins: he has the necessary dispositions for God to pardon him. His ejaculatory prayer wins God's forgiveness: "It is not without reason that some have said that prayer justifies; for repentant prayer or supplicant repentance, raising up the soul to God and re-uniting it to His goodness, without doubt obtains pardon in virtue of the holy love which gives it this sacred movement. And therefore we ought all to have very many such ejaculatory prayers, said as an act of loving repentance and with a desire of obtaining reconciliation with God, so that by thus laying our tribulation before our Savior, we may pour out our souls before and within His pitiful heart, which will receive them with mercy" (St. Francis de Sales, "Treatise on the Love of God", Book 2, Chapter 20).
***************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Friday, March 04, 2005
Abp. Burke Explains the Year of the Eucharist Indulgence
Before beginning the reflection upon our Holy Father’s teaching, I bring to your attention a wonderful gift to us from our Holy Father on the occasion of the observance of the Year of the Eucharist. I refer to the gift of the plenary indulgence. The Holy Father formally granted the indulgence on Dec. 17, 2004, and the gift was made public on Christmas Day, Dec. 25, 2004.Complete article is here.
St Francis de Sales Church Needs $1.8M for Repairs
The total architectural construction cost estimate for all site work and exterior work at the church and rectory buildings is $1,856,733. However, the majority of that work does not need to be done all at once, explained Thomas Richter, director of the archdiocesan Office of Building and Real Estate.More.
St. Francis de Sales Church was built in 1908, designed in the style of 13th-century German Gothic cathedrals. It was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1979.
Msgr. Vernon Gardin, vicar general of the archdiocese, drew a distinction between parishes and churches. The parish — the community of worship — of St. Francis de Sales is closing, but the church, the historic building, will remain open for use by another community of worship, Catholics who participate in the Latin Tridentine Mass.
The use of St. Francis de Sales Church as a site for the Latin Mass is part of a solution of how to maintain historic property, Msgr. Gardin said.
In its recommendations, the task force discussed the historic churches of South St. Louis, saying: "These buildings, large and small, are a testament to the faith that they nurtured in our city. In consultation with the Archdiocese of St. Louis, it is hoped that private philanthropy might find preserving some of these historic buildings an attractive endeavor."
Working to revive Gregorian chant
Mar. 04 (CWNews.com) - Eighty enthusiastic singers from five states gathered in Auburn, Alabama, on February 19 for the second annual Sacred Music Workshop, sponsored by the St. Cecilia Schola Cantorum , a chant and polyphony choir attached to St. Michaels Catholic Church. They came dedicated to discovering the sound and meaning of Gregorian chant and the music it inspired, and in the hope that it can again become part of Catholic parish life.More at The Forum at CWNews
Intercommunion with other Christians would end ecumenism
YONKERS, N.Y. (CNS) -- Allowing eucharistic intercommunion with non-Catholic Christians would not advance ecumenism but bring it to an end, Father Richard John Neuhaus said in a lecture March 2.More.
"A sure way not to reach a destination is to pretend you've already arrived," he said.
Father Neuhaus said pretending the "real but imperfect communion" that other Christians now have with the Catholic Church constituted the full bond of unity that is required for inviting them to share in the Eucharist would be "an act of duplicity."
The Deafening Silence of Pope John Paul II
More here.
John Paul II has lost his voice. But he speaks very clearly in his latest book, "Memory and Identity." In it, he deeply criticizes Western democracies. Two eminent scholars discuss the book's theses.
by Sandro Magister
ROMA, March 3, 2005 – John Paul II is silent; he has nearly lost his voice. But he continues to make an uproar, unsettling the Church and the world, hurling himself dauntlessly against what he considers the modern plague of the West: "subtle totalitarianism" under the cover of democracy, which carries out with impunity its slaughters of the innocents, the embryo-persons.
Both of these things happened at once on Thursday, February 24. The pope returned to the hospital for the last station of his Way of the Cross, that of silence. But on the same day his latest book, "Memory and Identity," arrived in bookstores in Italy and occupied the columns of newspapers all over the world. The volume is anything but reassuring. On only one other occasion in more than twenty-six years as pope has Karol Wojtyla made such stern statements against the killing of the unborn, which may be democratic, but is never legitimate in his view: in the 1995 encyclical "Evangelium Vitae."
In "Memory and Identity," John Paul II reasons on the limit that democratic parliaments must never transgress: the natural law inscribed within every man, even the one farthest from God.
The force of his reasoning is what irritates Catholics and secularists alike. Because the natural law that the pope invokes is not only a matter of the Church.
Pope will give Sunday blessing from hospital window
ROME (AFP) - Pope John Paul II will perform his traditional Angelus blessing from his hospital window this weekend, Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls revealed even though doctors have yet to decide on a date for his discharge.Source.
"The Angelus will be like last Sunday. The pope will participate, giving his blessing," Navarro-Valls said as he left Rome's Gemelli hospital after visiting the 84-year-old pope's 10th-floor suite.
"We will have 100 percent confirmation tomorrow," he said Friday.
Swedish Television Publishes Pope's Obituary
Swedish public television (SVT) mistakenly published an obituary for Pope John Paul II on its website, where it remained for more than five hours before it was taken down, the broadcasting company said on Friday.Source.
"This was a very unfortunate mistake," SVT spokesperson Johanna Niemi said.
An SVT employee had been working on the pope's obituary in advance when he mistakenly hit a button that posted the text on the website, Niemi said.
Under a picture of the ailing pontiff in an audience with the Swedish king and queen, the website stated: "Pope John Paul has died".
St. Patrick’s Day Parade March 12
The Annual St. Patrick’s Day Parade will take place on Saturday, March 12.Source.
It will be led by founder Joseph McGlynn, Jr.; Parade Committee Chairperson Timothy Brady, M.D.; Honorary Parade Marshal Archbishop Raymond Burke; Irish Guest of Honor Dr. Rory O’Hanlon, T.D.; Speaker of the House of the Irish Parliament; and Mayor Francis Slay.
The parade begins at noon at Broadway and Market Streets and proceeds west on Market past Union Station to 20th Street, where it will end.
Norwich bishop called lenient in Maine case
Is it worse for a Roman Catholic priest to give muddled homilies and run a private charity inefficiently, or to post graphic descriptions of his homosexual encounters with a subordinate on an Internet site featuring photographs of naked men and a priest with his arm around a young boy?And your answer is?
If you picked the first case, you would be correct.
Details here.
Is it not an Honor to be invited to speak?
Cardinal McCarrick believes "honors" mean honorary degrees and such, but exclude the granting of a pulpit from which to speak.
Article.
Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick, archbishop of Washington, said a task force he heads will seek to ensure that an agreement by the bishops to withhold such honors is enforced consistently and nationally. The plan to withhold the honors followed last year's decision by the bishops not to take a collective position on whether to allow Catholics who support abortion rights, such as Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, to receive Communion.What weakness...But there is hope, he is due to retire soon.
In an interview before his speech, McCarrick said he will argue that politicians who disagree with church teachings should be allowed to speak at Catholic colleges but should not receive honorary degrees. He said he decided in his own diocese, where many members of Congress worship, not to attempt to deny Communion to politicians who support abortion rights, because "I do not believe there is a place for confrontation at the altar."
Article.
John Krejci, the man denied Holy Communion in Lincoln...
...was a priest?
The article also refers to "Call to Action" as a reform group although, in reality, it is a subversive organization of professed Catholics seeking to 'reform' the Church in its own twisted image...
Article
John Krejci, a former priest and co-founder of the Nebraska chapter of Call to Action, said Bruskewitz denied him communion at Sacred Heart parish on Feb. 7, with "an unfriendly wave of his hand."I suppose we should be grateful for the "former".
The article also refers to "Call to Action" as a reform group although, in reality, it is a subversive organization of professed Catholics seeking to 'reform' the Church in its own twisted image...
Article
RSM Responds to the Holy Father's Recent Statements
Pope John Paul II is quickly fading. Certainly it is time for all Catholics to offer prayers for him, and the Church. However, because of his illness the Rainbow Sash Movement cannot be silent when Pope’s inner Circle continues to orchestrate a world wide web of homophobia directed at the international GLBT Community.Paraphrasing Archbishop Chaput's recent quip, we need to do this before they impose their insidious evils on us!
Reasonable people can only conclude the Pope’s recent statements can only be viewed as homophobic. He certainly has a fear of gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender persons, and that is the definition of the word homophobia. As an example of his words of fear the Pope recently said "Homosexual marriages are part of a ‘new ideology of evil’ that is insidiously threatening society, Pope John Paul says…" The pope is further quoted as saying that the endorsement of gay marriage "attempts to pit human rights against the family and against man."
The legitimate "ideology of evil" - the true insidious threat to our society - lies not in gay marriage, but in the heart of fundamentalist trying to impose their narrow version of rights and responsibilities on society.
Complete Response
Pope may miss events leading up to Easter
The health of Pope John Paul II continues to improve, the Vatican said Thursday. But the ailing pontiff might miss ceremonies leading up to Easter, the most important holiday on the Christian calendar.Source.
Vatican spokesman Joaquin Navarro-Valls would not say when the pope would be released from the hospital, where a week ago he underwent an emergency operation to insert a breathing tube in his neck.
Navarro-Valls told reporters it was also unclear what role John Paul, 84, will play during Holy Week beginning on Palm Sunday, March 20, and culminating in Easter the following Sunday. It is Christianity's most solemn period.
DCF's Schiavo Petition Unsealed
CLEARWATER - Credible new reports alleging abuse against Terri Schiavo make it imperative that she not be removed from life support until an investigation is completed, the state agency charged with protecting disabled adults said in court records unsealed Thursday.The press continues to get it wrong...she is not on "life support".
The brain-damaged woman's husband and guardian, Michael Schiavo, should not be allowed to remove her feeding tube March 18, Department of Children & Families official Michael Will said in a petition filed last week and unsealed Thursday at the request of The Tampa Tribune and News Channel 8.More here.
"The allegations in the abuse reports go to the heart of whether abuse, neglect and/or exploitation has been perpetrated by the guardian such that any relief afforded by this court to this guardian prior to the conclusion of such investigation would be tragically misplaced," wrote Will, DCF's Adult Protective Investigations supervisor.
Gospel for Friday, 3rd Week of Lent
Mark 12:28-34
The Greatest Commandment of All
[28] One of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that He (Jesus) answered them well, asked Him, "Which commandment is the first of all?" [29] Jesus answered, "The first is, `Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; [30] and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' [31] The second is this, `You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these." [32] And the scribe said to Him, "You are right, Teacher; You have truly said that He is one, and there is no other than He; [33] and to love with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." [34] And when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, He said to him, "You are not far from the Kingdom of God." And after that no one dared to ask Him any question.
****************
Commentary:
28-34. The doctor of the law who asks Jesus this question is obviously an upright man who is sincerely seeking the truth. He was impressed by Jesus' earlier reply (verses 18-27) and he wants to learn more from Him. His question is to the point and Jesus devotes time to instructing him, though he will soon castigate the scribes, of whom this man is one (cf. Mark 12:38ff).
Jesus sees in this man not just a scribe but a person who is looking for the truth. And His teaching finds its way into the man's heart. The scribe repeats what Jesus says, savoring it, and our Lord offers him an affectionate word which encourages his definitive conversion: "You are not far from the Kingdom of God." This encounter reminds us of His meeting with Nicodemus (cf. John 3:1ff). On the doctrinal content of these two commandments cf. note on Matthew 22:34-40.
[Note on Matthew 22:34-40 states:
In reply to the question, our Lord points out that the whole law can be condensed into two commandments: the first and more important consists in unconditional love of God; the second is a consequence and result of the first, because when man is loved, St. Thomas says, God is loved, for man is the image of God (cf. "Commentary on St. Matthew", 22:4).
A person who genuinely loves God also loves his fellows because he realizes that they are his brothers and sisters, children of the same Father, redeemed by the same blood of our Lord Jesus Christ: "This commandment we have from Him, that he who loves God should love his brother also" (1 John 4:21). However, if we love man for man's sake without reference to God, this love will become an obstacle in the way of keeping the first commandment, and then it is no longer genuine love of our neighbor. But love of our neighbor for God's sake is clear proof that we love God: "If anyone says, `I love God', and hates his brother, he is a liar" (1 John 4:20).
"You shall love your neighbor as yourself": here our Lord establishes as the guideline for our love of neighbor the love each of us has for himself; both love of others and love of self are based on love of God. Hence, in some cases it can happen that God requires us to put our neighbor's need before our own; in others, not: it depends on what value, in light of God's love, needs to be put on the spiritual and material factors involved.
Obviously spiritual goods take absolute precedence over material ones, even over life itself. Therefore, spiritual goods, be they our own or our neighbor's, must be the first to be safeguarded. If the spiritual good in question is the supreme one for the salvation of the soul, no one is justified in putting his own soul into certain danger of being condemned in order to save another, because given human freedom we can never be absolutely sure what personal choice another person may make: this is the situation in the parable (cf. Matthew 25:1-13), where the wise virgins refuse to give oil to the foolish ones; similarly St. Paul says that he would wish himself to be rejected if that could save his brothers (cf. Romans 9:3)--an unreal theoretical situation. However, what is quite clear is that we have to do all we can to save our brothers, conscious that, if someone helps to bring a sinner back to the way, he will save himself from eternal death and cover a multitude of his own sins (James 5:20). From all this we can deduce that self-love of the right kind, based on God's love for man, necessarily involves forgetting oneself in order to love God and our neighbor for God.]
30. This commandment of the Old Law, ratified by Jesus, shows, above all, God's great desire to engage in intimate conversation with man: "would it not have sufficed to publish a permission giving us leave to love Him? [...]. He makes a stronger declaration of His passionate love for us, and commands us to love Him with all our power, lest the consideration of His majesty and our misery, which make so great a distance and inequality between us, or some other pretext, divert us from His love. In this He well shows that He did not leave in us for nothing the natural inclination to love Him, for to the end that it may not be idle, He urges us by His general commandment to employ it, and that this commandment may be effected, there is no living man He has not furnished him abundantly with all means requisite thereto" (St. Francis de Sales, "Treatise on the Love of God", Book 2, Chapter 8).
****************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
The Greatest Commandment of All
[28] One of the scribes came up and heard them disputing with one another, and seeing that He (Jesus) answered them well, asked Him, "Which commandment is the first of all?" [29] Jesus answered, "The first is, `Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; [30] and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' [31] The second is this, `You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no other commandment greater than these." [32] And the scribe said to Him, "You are right, Teacher; You have truly said that He is one, and there is no other than He; [33] and to love with all the heart, and with all the understanding, and with all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as oneself, is much more than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." [34] And when Jesus saw that he answered wisely, He said to him, "You are not far from the Kingdom of God." And after that no one dared to ask Him any question.
****************
Commentary:
28-34. The doctor of the law who asks Jesus this question is obviously an upright man who is sincerely seeking the truth. He was impressed by Jesus' earlier reply (verses 18-27) and he wants to learn more from Him. His question is to the point and Jesus devotes time to instructing him, though he will soon castigate the scribes, of whom this man is one (cf. Mark 12:38ff).
Jesus sees in this man not just a scribe but a person who is looking for the truth. And His teaching finds its way into the man's heart. The scribe repeats what Jesus says, savoring it, and our Lord offers him an affectionate word which encourages his definitive conversion: "You are not far from the Kingdom of God." This encounter reminds us of His meeting with Nicodemus (cf. John 3:1ff). On the doctrinal content of these two commandments cf. note on Matthew 22:34-40.
[Note on Matthew 22:34-40 states:
In reply to the question, our Lord points out that the whole law can be condensed into two commandments: the first and more important consists in unconditional love of God; the second is a consequence and result of the first, because when man is loved, St. Thomas says, God is loved, for man is the image of God (cf. "Commentary on St. Matthew", 22:4).
A person who genuinely loves God also loves his fellows because he realizes that they are his brothers and sisters, children of the same Father, redeemed by the same blood of our Lord Jesus Christ: "This commandment we have from Him, that he who loves God should love his brother also" (1 John 4:21). However, if we love man for man's sake without reference to God, this love will become an obstacle in the way of keeping the first commandment, and then it is no longer genuine love of our neighbor. But love of our neighbor for God's sake is clear proof that we love God: "If anyone says, `I love God', and hates his brother, he is a liar" (1 John 4:20).
"You shall love your neighbor as yourself": here our Lord establishes as the guideline for our love of neighbor the love each of us has for himself; both love of others and love of self are based on love of God. Hence, in some cases it can happen that God requires us to put our neighbor's need before our own; in others, not: it depends on what value, in light of God's love, needs to be put on the spiritual and material factors involved.
Obviously spiritual goods take absolute precedence over material ones, even over life itself. Therefore, spiritual goods, be they our own or our neighbor's, must be the first to be safeguarded. If the spiritual good in question is the supreme one for the salvation of the soul, no one is justified in putting his own soul into certain danger of being condemned in order to save another, because given human freedom we can never be absolutely sure what personal choice another person may make: this is the situation in the parable (cf. Matthew 25:1-13), where the wise virgins refuse to give oil to the foolish ones; similarly St. Paul says that he would wish himself to be rejected if that could save his brothers (cf. Romans 9:3)--an unreal theoretical situation. However, what is quite clear is that we have to do all we can to save our brothers, conscious that, if someone helps to bring a sinner back to the way, he will save himself from eternal death and cover a multitude of his own sins (James 5:20). From all this we can deduce that self-love of the right kind, based on God's love for man, necessarily involves forgetting oneself in order to love God and our neighbor for God.]
30. This commandment of the Old Law, ratified by Jesus, shows, above all, God's great desire to engage in intimate conversation with man: "would it not have sufficed to publish a permission giving us leave to love Him? [...]. He makes a stronger declaration of His passionate love for us, and commands us to love Him with all our power, lest the consideration of His majesty and our misery, which make so great a distance and inequality between us, or some other pretext, divert us from His love. In this He well shows that He did not leave in us for nothing the natural inclination to love Him, for to the end that it may not be idle, He urges us by His general commandment to employ it, and that this commandment may be effected, there is no living man He has not furnished him abundantly with all means requisite thereto" (St. Francis de Sales, "Treatise on the Love of God", Book 2, Chapter 8).
****************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Poles faithful to Archbishop look to future
The Polish apostolate in St. Louis is looking forward to the future.More here.
Now sharing space at St. John the Apostle and Evangelist Parish Downtown, its members will move to St. Agatha Parish in South St. Louis by July 1 when a parish reorganization plan takes place.
Parishioner Ewa M. Dyk said the parish, made up mainly of Polish immigrants who speak Polish, has many plans for the new facilities.
Plans include restarting parish classes for children in the Polish culture and history, she said. St. John has limited space for these activities, said Msgr. Dennis Delaney, pastor of St. John the Apostle.
"We don’t have any classroom space," he said. "That is one of the concerns the archbishop was trying to address" when he decided to move the community to St. Agatha, Msgr. Delaney said.
Also, "they desire a place of their own," he noted.
About 125 people attend the 9 a.m. Sunday Mass in Polish at St. John. The apostolate is served by Father Adam Hurbanczuk, a native of Poland.
Thursday, March 03, 2005
Catholic Priest to Withhold Communion from Pro Gay “Marriage” Politician
COBALT, Ontario, March 3, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A Catholic priest said he would deny Communion to his parishioner – Catholic NDP Member of Parliament for Timmins-James Bay, Charles Angus – because of his support for same-sex “marriage” legislation.A priest who expresses concern for his people's salvation! Of course, there are many, many other priests who have the same concern for others' salvation. It's certainly encouraging to see actions with words, at times, to remind us of the courage it takes to be a priest today.
Fr. Lemire said that all communication with Angus prior to a call from the Timmins news February 19 was private, and that Angus contacted the press. Fr. Lemire said there has been considerable support from the parish and abroad. Fr. Lemire explained that as Angus’s pastor, he has two responsibilities: Angus’s salvation; and the salvation of his other parishioners. Fr. Lemire said he could not allow Angus to continue to scandalize other Catholics.
More.
Who Are You? asks PolishSTL
**** Updated ****
As noted in a previous post, "PolishSTL" claims to be "R. Bach". Now, Richard Bach is the spokesman for the St. Stanislaus Kostka Parish - the first group, so to speak - the group which has demonstrated an unwillingness to follow the directives of the Archbishop or the Holy See. I have no reason to doubt that "PolishSTL" is Mr. Bach. I am not comfortable at this point stating that "R Bach" is "Richard Bach". Below, "RB" means "PolishSTL"...LRS is I - the unknown one.
I apologize in advance if I have made any typos, or have misspoken...This post was a test of charity, and I'm afraid I may not have passed the test. I reserve the right to make corrections as I become aware of them.
Additionally, much of the conversation seems to be intentionally redirected to other issues rather than to the primary issue of obedience to the lawful directives of the Archbishop. Be that as it may, there is always a path which allows us to return to this issue of obedience - since humility is so fundamental and obedience is the exercise of humility.
**********
Source of material.
RB: Why do you make assumption and presumptions to attack what I speak and present?
LRS: I attacked nothing. I asked you some very simple questions and I asked about the relevance of pointing to the crimes of one priest with respect to the Institute of Christ the King?
RB: I provide you with documents concerning issues that I address because you have constantly requested proof ... so I give it and you spit at it.
LRS: You have provided nothing but a handful of primarily irrelevant links, and you claim that this is satisfactory? You have given nothing of any substance, therefore, there is nothing at which to spit. I have only witnessed confirmation of a rather inept attempt to sidestep direct questions.
Shall we review this "proof" which you so generously provide?
1. I asked for proof of charges that the "Appeal Letter" was not written by the signatories. You replied, "Please understand that this letter was written for them...not stating negatives, stating a fact." Based upon your word alone, you expect me to believe this unsubstantiated charge that someone else wrote the letter? Ewa Dyk, one of the signatories to the Appeal Letter, has already refuted this here.
2. Your proof regarding the total number of "exiled" parishioners is nothing less than a picture from KSDK's web site. Are you really serious? This is your "proof"? I have confirmation from one of the signatories of the letter that the number is about 150 and growing each week. Whom do you think one is prone to believe?
3. Your proof of archdiocesan intentions of keeping bank accounts 'fat' by relying on a story from WB11 demonstrates a mistake, possibly caused by looking for "ammunition" or an apparent inability to read. The report states that "there were many priests that came to us and said we're having trouble running our schools, we're having trouble keeping our bank accounts fat and we're having trouble with parishioners who are moving out." Did you catch that? Let's try and make it simple - it was the priests, the pastors of the parishes who said that, not the archdiocese. Your attempt to attribute fault where none exists is sadly, quite pathetic, and it reveals a great deal about a person.
4. You provide as "proof" of Archbishop Burke's character, two web links relating to a pervert in the Diocese of La Crosse. Your failure to provide all the details, whether intentional or not, could be construed as nothing less than character assassination - the grave, mortal sin of calumny. I have previously refuted your "proof" by providing sufficient information to indicate that the Archbishop acted swiftly and decisively - facts which you seemed to ignore.
And with respect to the Institute of Christ the King coming to St. Louis:
I was only curious about your motives, as you seemed to implicitly indict the Institute of Christ the King in your post by stating, "they have been hit by the abuse scandals in Wisconsin by their leader's actions." As stated above, the Institute and Archbishop Burke quickly addressed the crime.
Some of the questions I asked you about the Institute, etc., are quite relevant to the situation as to why additional priests were brought in to say the Latin Mass. Since you have tacitly admitted that you do not know why, I can give you another reason, although there are, I suspect, a number others.
The physical ailments of the priests saying the Latin Mass were becoming so problematic and troublesome that they were nearly unable to distribute Holy Communion. This would have been readily apparent to someone who had been there, hence my reason for asking.
Lastly, in what appears to be an attempt to garner support for your cause from the SSPX crowd at FreeRepublic, you bring up Archbishop Burke along with Cardinal Hoyos and his difficulties experienced with reaching a reconciliation with the SSPX. What is your implication by stating that Archbishop Burke and Cardinal Hoyos are friends? Is it not permissible that the two men are friends? Is there something sinister about this as it relates to St. Stanislaus? Is this, then, Archbishop Burke's friendship with Cardinal Hoyos, the missing link which explains the Archbishop's policy regarding St. Stanislaus? Evidently, you see Archbishop Burke's policy so inextricably linked with Cardinal Hoyos' policy with the SSPX that you "suspect" a pattern here - a conspiracy, if you will. I will admit that you seem to have an active imagination!
I regret you feel the way you do about my questions. Perhaps the questions are too painful to answer? Perhaps, you are much too sensitive these days with all the turmoil at St. Stanislaus?
On to the next Post...
**************************
Source for this response.
RB: You still have not told me WHO YOU ARE.
LRS: Is my identity important to the discussion? I have not chosen to hide behind a "handle". My ID is my name.
RB: I have another concern with what you are posting.
LRS: Why is that? Because it is the truth, because it is factual?
RB: ...we are in the same calamity [as Jesus and the Pharisees] now with the 'selective' application of Canon Law.
LRS: You continually whine and complain about the 'selective' application of Canon Law. Would you refuse to submit to the authority of a police officer who would stop only you for speeding when all of the others around you were going just as fast as you? Would you refuse to accept the speeding ticket because it was issued 'selectively'? Will that be your defense before the judge?
There is little difference between the rights of the State and the rights of the Church in this regard. Just as the State has laws to protect society and the authority to compel obedience to its authority, so does the Church possess similar powers and authority, and this power extends to the bishops as successors of the Apostles, chosen by Christ. This is a fact, whether you choose to accept it or not. It applies to disciplinary matters as well as doctrinal matters, regardless of one's misguided opinions to the contrary.
It seems that many, if not most, impositions of canonical requirements or penalties, are, of necessity, 'selective'. Your many complaints ring false. It reminds me of the whining we did as children, when only one of us was caught fighting or doing something contrary to the wishes of our parents. This happened despite the fact that, many times, all of us were involved. It's time to grow up, to mature, to accept the consequences of one's actions. Repentance works wonders to repair the soul. I will need to seek repentance after this post, I suspect.
RB: Now, taking another perspective, we have a newsletter in the St. Louis diocese called The Review. NOTHING concerning St. Stanislaus is allowed in that print without the bishop's permission. Why?
LRS: Probably for the same reason I do not allow you or certain others to post comments on my blog. The goal of ascertaining the truth, of learning what it means to be humble, of promoting the Christian virtues, of repairing the disunity and scandal in the Church, is not accomplished by personal, unsubstantiated, or vindictive attacks on the Archbishop or the Church.
As the ultimate responsibility of the content of the St. Louis Review falls to the Archbishop, he, of necessity, has the final say about its content. Considering that you already have a mechanism for promoting propaganda, (actually 2 - the web site and the Post Dispatch) why would you seek another?
RB: He has stated that his word is the only Truth.
LRS: Oh, really? Is this taken out of context? Prove that he has said this! I'm all ears!
RB: Back to the infallibility question ... the Archbishop is not infallible.
LRS: And your point is what? Is this meant to 'prove' something? Lumen Gentium 25 tells us that:
A rational and reasonable person can only wonder, based on the responses you and others have given during the past few months, "What is the real issue here?"
In closing, do you think it might be time that you resign as spokesman as you seem to have severely and irreparably damaged your credibility?
As noted in a previous post, "PolishSTL" claims to be "R. Bach". Now, Richard Bach is the spokesman for the St. Stanislaus Kostka Parish - the first group, so to speak - the group which has demonstrated an unwillingness to follow the directives of the Archbishop or the Holy See. I have no reason to doubt that "PolishSTL" is Mr. Bach. I am not comfortable at this point stating that "R Bach" is "Richard Bach". Below, "RB" means "PolishSTL"...LRS is I - the unknown one.
I apologize in advance if I have made any typos, or have misspoken...This post was a test of charity, and I'm afraid I may not have passed the test. I reserve the right to make corrections as I become aware of them.
Additionally, much of the conversation seems to be intentionally redirected to other issues rather than to the primary issue of obedience to the lawful directives of the Archbishop. Be that as it may, there is always a path which allows us to return to this issue of obedience - since humility is so fundamental and obedience is the exercise of humility.
**********
Source of material.
RB: Why do you make assumption and presumptions to attack what I speak and present?
LRS: I attacked nothing. I asked you some very simple questions and I asked about the relevance of pointing to the crimes of one priest with respect to the Institute of Christ the King?
RB: I provide you with documents concerning issues that I address because you have constantly requested proof ... so I give it and you spit at it.
LRS: You have provided nothing but a handful of primarily irrelevant links, and you claim that this is satisfactory? You have given nothing of any substance, therefore, there is nothing at which to spit. I have only witnessed confirmation of a rather inept attempt to sidestep direct questions.
Shall we review this "proof" which you so generously provide?
1. I asked for proof of charges that the "Appeal Letter" was not written by the signatories. You replied, "Please understand that this letter was written for them...not stating negatives, stating a fact." Based upon your word alone, you expect me to believe this unsubstantiated charge that someone else wrote the letter? Ewa Dyk, one of the signatories to the Appeal Letter, has already refuted this here.
2. Your proof regarding the total number of "exiled" parishioners is nothing less than a picture from KSDK's web site. Are you really serious? This is your "proof"? I have confirmation from one of the signatories of the letter that the number is about 150 and growing each week. Whom do you think one is prone to believe?
3. Your proof of archdiocesan intentions of keeping bank accounts 'fat' by relying on a story from WB11 demonstrates a mistake, possibly caused by looking for "ammunition" or an apparent inability to read. The report states that "there were many priests that came to us and said we're having trouble running our schools, we're having trouble keeping our bank accounts fat and we're having trouble with parishioners who are moving out." Did you catch that? Let's try and make it simple - it was the priests, the pastors of the parishes who said that, not the archdiocese. Your attempt to attribute fault where none exists is sadly, quite pathetic, and it reveals a great deal about a person.
4. You provide as "proof" of Archbishop Burke's character, two web links relating to a pervert in the Diocese of La Crosse. Your failure to provide all the details, whether intentional or not, could be construed as nothing less than character assassination - the grave, mortal sin of calumny. I have previously refuted your "proof" by providing sufficient information to indicate that the Archbishop acted swiftly and decisively - facts which you seemed to ignore.
And with respect to the Institute of Christ the King coming to St. Louis:
I was only curious about your motives, as you seemed to implicitly indict the Institute of Christ the King in your post by stating, "they have been hit by the abuse scandals in Wisconsin by their leader's actions." As stated above, the Institute and Archbishop Burke quickly addressed the crime.
Some of the questions I asked you about the Institute, etc., are quite relevant to the situation as to why additional priests were brought in to say the Latin Mass. Since you have tacitly admitted that you do not know why, I can give you another reason, although there are, I suspect, a number others.
The physical ailments of the priests saying the Latin Mass were becoming so problematic and troublesome that they were nearly unable to distribute Holy Communion. This would have been readily apparent to someone who had been there, hence my reason for asking.
Lastly, in what appears to be an attempt to garner support for your cause from the SSPX crowd at FreeRepublic, you bring up Archbishop Burke along with Cardinal Hoyos and his difficulties experienced with reaching a reconciliation with the SSPX. What is your implication by stating that Archbishop Burke and Cardinal Hoyos are friends? Is it not permissible that the two men are friends? Is there something sinister about this as it relates to St. Stanislaus? Is this, then, Archbishop Burke's friendship with Cardinal Hoyos, the missing link which explains the Archbishop's policy regarding St. Stanislaus? Evidently, you see Archbishop Burke's policy so inextricably linked with Cardinal Hoyos' policy with the SSPX that you "suspect" a pattern here - a conspiracy, if you will. I will admit that you seem to have an active imagination!
I regret you feel the way you do about my questions. Perhaps the questions are too painful to answer? Perhaps, you are much too sensitive these days with all the turmoil at St. Stanislaus?
On to the next Post...
**************************
Source for this response.
RB: You still have not told me WHO YOU ARE.
LRS: Is my identity important to the discussion? I have not chosen to hide behind a "handle". My ID is my name.
RB: I have another concern with what you are posting.
LRS: Why is that? Because it is the truth, because it is factual?
RB: ...we are in the same calamity [as Jesus and the Pharisees] now with the 'selective' application of Canon Law.
LRS: You continually whine and complain about the 'selective' application of Canon Law. Would you refuse to submit to the authority of a police officer who would stop only you for speeding when all of the others around you were going just as fast as you? Would you refuse to accept the speeding ticket because it was issued 'selectively'? Will that be your defense before the judge?
There is little difference between the rights of the State and the rights of the Church in this regard. Just as the State has laws to protect society and the authority to compel obedience to its authority, so does the Church possess similar powers and authority, and this power extends to the bishops as successors of the Apostles, chosen by Christ. This is a fact, whether you choose to accept it or not. It applies to disciplinary matters as well as doctrinal matters, regardless of one's misguided opinions to the contrary.
It seems that many, if not most, impositions of canonical requirements or penalties, are, of necessity, 'selective'. Your many complaints ring false. It reminds me of the whining we did as children, when only one of us was caught fighting or doing something contrary to the wishes of our parents. This happened despite the fact that, many times, all of us were involved. It's time to grow up, to mature, to accept the consequences of one's actions. Repentance works wonders to repair the soul. I will need to seek repentance after this post, I suspect.
RB: Now, taking another perspective, we have a newsletter in the St. Louis diocese called The Review. NOTHING concerning St. Stanislaus is allowed in that print without the bishop's permission. Why?
LRS: Probably for the same reason I do not allow you or certain others to post comments on my blog. The goal of ascertaining the truth, of learning what it means to be humble, of promoting the Christian virtues, of repairing the disunity and scandal in the Church, is not accomplished by personal, unsubstantiated, or vindictive attacks on the Archbishop or the Church.
As the ultimate responsibility of the content of the St. Louis Review falls to the Archbishop, he, of necessity, has the final say about its content. Considering that you already have a mechanism for promoting propaganda, (actually 2 - the web site and the Post Dispatch) why would you seek another?
RB: He has stated that his word is the only Truth.
LRS: Oh, really? Is this taken out of context? Prove that he has said this! I'm all ears!
RB: Back to the infallibility question ... the Archbishop is not infallible.
LRS: And your point is what? Is this meant to 'prove' something? Lumen Gentium 25 tells us that:
Although the bishops, taken individually, do not enjoy the privilege of infallibility, they do, however, proclaim infallibly the doctrine of Christ on the following conditions: namely, when, even though dispersed throughout the world but preserving for all that amongst themselves and with Peter's successor the bond of communion, in their authoritative teaching concerning matters of faith and morals, they are in agreement that a particular teaching is to be held definitively and absolutely....As I (and others) have stated before and as you and others are so loath to admit, the Archbishop has the power to govern the archdiocese, irrespective of the issue of infallibility. You waste a tremendous amount of energy by "beating this dead horse" of an issue.
A rational and reasonable person can only wonder, based on the responses you and others have given during the past few months, "What is the real issue here?"
In closing, do you think it might be time that you resign as spokesman as you seem to have severely and irreparably damaged your credibility?
Priest involved with St. Louis exorcism dies
I saw this on the news this morning as I was getting ready for work.
The Rev. Walter H. Halloran was a handsome and athletic Jesuit scholastic in his 20s when he found himself part of a religious experience that would spawn a series of books, movies and documentaries and fascinate people for generations.More.
You've probably heard of "The Exorcist." Father Halloran, who died Tuesday (March 1, 2005) at 83, was the last living Jesuit to be involved in an exorcism that took place in 1949 at a psychiatric unit in St. Louis. The incident provided the inspiration for William Peter Blatty's 1971 runaway bestseller by that name, which led to the hit movie, and a few more of lesser box office appeal, including a recent prequel.
Father Halloran died at a Jesuit retirement home in Wauwatosa, Wis., a Milwaukee suburb. But he spent many years in St. Louis from the 1940s and on into the 1970s. He was just 27 and a history student at St. Louis University when he was summoned to the psychiatric wing at Alexian Brothers Hospital, 3933 South Broadway.
United States Presses Ahead with Anti-Abortion Amendment at UN
Media reports that US is backing down are not correctMore here.
UNITED NATIONS, March 3, 2005 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Contrary to reports by the New York Times, Reuters and countless other news agencies, the United States is not backing down from its amendment to clarify that the 1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action do not call for the right to abortion.
At a press briefing this morning, Antonia Kirkland from the pro-abortion NGO Equality Now asked U.S. Ambassador Ellen Sauerbrey, head of the U.S. delegation, if the US was withdrawing its amendment as reported by the New York Times. Ambassador Sauerbrey responded, “No.” She noted that the US would continue to work to pass the document to reaffirm the Beijing Declaration with its clarifying amendment.
Pope urges care for liturgy
Rome, Mar. 03 (CWNews.com) - In a message to the Congregation for Divine Worship, signed from his bed in Gemelli Hospital, Pope John Paul II has called for careful attention to the celebration of the Eucharistic liturgy.More.
Taking note that the theme of the Congregation's meeting is ars celebrandi , the Holy Father said that although it is the power of the Holy Spirit that makes the Eucharist effective, still "it calls for a human response." The liturgy should bring together the clergy and laity in act of "contemplation and Christian coherence," he wrote.
Pope Improving, Meeting with Collaborators
VATICAN CITY, MAR 3, 2005 (VIS) - Holy See Press Office Director Joaquin Navarro-Valls today released the following declaration to journalists concerning the health of the Pope:More.
"The health of the Holy Father John Paul II continues to improve and show progress.
"As previously stated, the Pope is eating regularly and spends several hours each day in an armchair.
"The surgical wound is healing.
"The daily sessions for rehabilitation of breathing and speaking continue, with the active collaboration of the Holy Father.
"The next bulletin will be issued on Monday, March 7 at 12:30 p.m."
Vatican gets names of 7 accused of abuse
DUBUQUE, Iowa (AP) - The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Dubuque disclosed Wednesday that it had sent the names of seven Catholic priests accused of sexual abuse to the Vatican for possible punishment.More.
"We are awaiting the response," said Monsignor James Barta, vicar general of the archdiocese, which covers 30 northeast Iowa counties and the cities of Waterloo, Cedar Rapids, Dubuque and Mason City.
The Right of the Church to Give Commandments
Catholics have a duty to obey the commandments of the Church as well as the
commandments of God.
As most of us know, a number of commandments and laws have been made for us by the Church. The Popes and the councils of the Church have defined and formulated injunctions for all the faithful; for cardinals, bishops, priests, religious orders, and for people in every state and condition of life. She possesses a record of a complete constitution and a system of law built up and developed during the many centuries of her existence. It might be too much to expect that every Catholic would study and learn these records by heart, and it would be no small task to go into each clause separately in explain it in detail. For ordinary purposes the commandments of the Church are reducible to the Precepts of the Church, which are necessary for all, and apply both to clergy and laity; they are binding on all, and must be universally known and observed.
1. Has the Church the right to give commandments?
2. What is the logical outcome of such a right?
1. Has the Church the right to give commandments?
The Church most certainly has the right to give commandments; our reason alone suffices to tell us that. Even placing the Church on the lowest possible footing it must be admitted that it is at all events an organized association, or union, or society, or community; one on a very big scale, and of a very remarkable nature. Now even the smallest association of any kind can not exist without a head and some kind of guidance and direction. If the object be only to meet together and sing, there must be some kind of authoritative organization to determine and say what is to be done. Now the community of the Church, which is so complete and perfect in its union, must of necessity have superiors who hold in their hands the power to give laws and to make rules and regulations. Mere common sense tells us this.
The Church is a real kingdom; that kingdom of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. It's dominion extends beyond all other kingdoms; its origin, rooted in Christ, reaches up to Paradise; founded with the most sublime object, invested with the mission of saving the souls of men, its work is not for this world, though it is in this world. It is for the world to come, for heaven. The head of this kingdom is Jesus Christ, King of Kings, Lord of hosts. Who will deny Him the right of giving commandments or of granting this right to others? It is from Him that the Church receives her power and right of giving commandments. He says "All power is given to Me in heaven and on earth."
Mark well: "All power." All power over heavean, all power over earth. Now does not every leader depute others to represent him, investing them with power and authority? This is what our Saviour did: "As the Father sent Me, I also send you" - "Whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven; whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven." - "He who hears you hears Me, and he who despises you despises Me."
What is the meaning of all of this? "I make over to you My power; I depute you to take My place; your laws shall be as binding as though they had been made in heaven; to obey you is to obey Me, to disobey you is to disobey Me."
It is with justice, then, that we are taught that the Church derives her right to give commandments from Jesus Christ Himself, who has commissioned her to guide and govern the faithful in His name.
The Church possessed this power from the beginning; as early as the days of the apostles she held her councils and issued her decrees. St. Paul gave directions regulating the laws of marriage between pagans and Christians, and concerning the fulfillment of the Jewish ordinance, and probably on many other subjects of which we have no account.
2. What is the logical outcome of the Church's right to give commandments?
It has a two-fold result; a result affecting the Church itself, and a result affecting us.
If the Church has the power to give commandments she must also have the power to enforce their observance, and to punish those who transgress them.
If a teacher has the right to impose tasks upon his pupils and exact the performance of them no one would dispute that he must also be entitled to ascertain that these tasks are really performed; nor can the further right to punish the lazy and negligence students be denied him.
If the State has the power to issue laws, then its right to enforce their observance by means of the services of the police, and to punish those who offend against them, follows as a natural consequence.
Laws would be meaningless, the authority of the State would become a mockery, if the right to issue edicts was not backed up by the power to enforce them and to punish those who transgress them; the sword of justice would be blunted, indeed.
A king not only wears a crown on his head, the symbol of the highest authority which alone has the right to command; he also holds in his hand the scepter, the emblem of punitive authority.
The order of things in the Church is the same. The Son of God has given her all power, not only to give commandments, but to watch over their observance and to punish those who disobey them. Priests are punished by being pronounced unworthy or incapable of saying Mass, the further exercise of their sacred office is forbidden them, they are declared unfit for the ministry, and are expelled from the ranks of the clergy.
Rebellious laymen are denied the sacraments and the participation in the Holy Sacrifice. The Church does not recoil when punishment is necessary, but she does not punished too severely, only with drawing that of which the offender has made himself a unworthy, and only punishes for such time as he refuses to amend; she punishes with the object of converting. She has the right to punish and she exercises that right; for this reason, just as a king wields a scepter, St. Peter holds the keys, and a Bishop carries a shepherd staff in his hand.
Out of the right to give commandments arises for the Church also the right to insist on their being observed, and to punish those who disobey them. But for us, too, there is a result. What is it? For us there results the obligation to keep them; if the Church has received this right to give commandments from Christ it follows that if we wish to please Him we must fulfill these commandments. "He that hears you hears Me; he that despises you despises Me."
The matter is clear. In is folly to say: "Yes, we know we must obey the commandments of God, but we are not obliged to obey the commandments of the Church or her Bishops; they are framed to by men, and are merely human inventions; one may be a very good Christian and yet disregard them." It is also gravely sinful to say this or hold this view.
The commandments of the Church are certainly the work of men, but of men who stand at the very head of the Church; God's representatives empowered by Christ to make laws and commandments.
Is it not the duty of a child to obey his parents? Most certainly. Why? Because it is the will of God. Is a citizen not under an obligation to submit to the laws of the State? Certainly. And why? Because of all lawful authority derives its power from God. How, then, can we refuse obedience to the Church, which has been so clearly and expressly charged to make and issue commandments?
Let us, therefore, obey the commandments of the Church. They are neither numerous nor hard to follow; they are framed by a gentle mother, who asks of her children only what is for their good.
All pious and faithful Christians are agreed that it is a grievous sin and a grave matter to disobey deliberately a commandment of the Church or a directive of a Bishop. Love of our Savior, of the Church, of our neighbor, the horror of sin, solicitude for our salvation are the motives which should lead us to keep faithfully the laws wisely made for the kingdom of Christ upon earth.
[Adapted from Popular Sermons on the Catechism, Fr. Humbert Bamberg, Volume 2, Sermon 39, (1914)]
commandments of God.
As most of us know, a number of commandments and laws have been made for us by the Church. The Popes and the councils of the Church have defined and formulated injunctions for all the faithful; for cardinals, bishops, priests, religious orders, and for people in every state and condition of life. She possesses a record of a complete constitution and a system of law built up and developed during the many centuries of her existence. It might be too much to expect that every Catholic would study and learn these records by heart, and it would be no small task to go into each clause separately in explain it in detail. For ordinary purposes the commandments of the Church are reducible to the Precepts of the Church, which are necessary for all, and apply both to clergy and laity; they are binding on all, and must be universally known and observed.
In a "Catechism of Christian Doctrine" approved by Cardinal Vaughan and the bishops of England, six Commandments of the Church are enumerated. These are:It is important to answer the questions:
1. to keep the Sundays and Holy Days of obligation holy, by hearing Mass and resting from servile work;
2. to keep the days of fasting and abstinence appointed by the Church;
3. to go to confession at least once a year;
4. to receive the Blessed Sacrament at least once a year and that at Easter or thereabouts;
5. to contribute to the support of our pastors;
6. not to marry within a certain degree of kindred nor to solemnize marriage at the forbidden times.
This list is the same as that which the Fathers of the Third Plenary Council of Baltimore (1886) prescribed for the United States. Source.
1. Has the Church the right to give commandments?
2. What is the logical outcome of such a right?
1. Has the Church the right to give commandments?
The Church most certainly has the right to give commandments; our reason alone suffices to tell us that. Even placing the Church on the lowest possible footing it must be admitted that it is at all events an organized association, or union, or society, or community; one on a very big scale, and of a very remarkable nature. Now even the smallest association of any kind can not exist without a head and some kind of guidance and direction. If the object be only to meet together and sing, there must be some kind of authoritative organization to determine and say what is to be done. Now the community of the Church, which is so complete and perfect in its union, must of necessity have superiors who hold in their hands the power to give laws and to make rules and regulations. Mere common sense tells us this.
The Church is a real kingdom; that kingdom of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. It's dominion extends beyond all other kingdoms; its origin, rooted in Christ, reaches up to Paradise; founded with the most sublime object, invested with the mission of saving the souls of men, its work is not for this world, though it is in this world. It is for the world to come, for heaven. The head of this kingdom is Jesus Christ, King of Kings, Lord of hosts. Who will deny Him the right of giving commandments or of granting this right to others? It is from Him that the Church receives her power and right of giving commandments. He says "All power is given to Me in heaven and on earth."
Mark well: "All power." All power over heavean, all power over earth. Now does not every leader depute others to represent him, investing them with power and authority? This is what our Saviour did: "As the Father sent Me, I also send you" - "Whatsoever you shall bind on earth shall be bound also in heaven; whatsoever you loose on earth shall be loosed also in heaven." - "He who hears you hears Me, and he who despises you despises Me."
What is the meaning of all of this? "I make over to you My power; I depute you to take My place; your laws shall be as binding as though they had been made in heaven; to obey you is to obey Me, to disobey you is to disobey Me."
It is with justice, then, that we are taught that the Church derives her right to give commandments from Jesus Christ Himself, who has commissioned her to guide and govern the faithful in His name.
The Church possessed this power from the beginning; as early as the days of the apostles she held her councils and issued her decrees. St. Paul gave directions regulating the laws of marriage between pagans and Christians, and concerning the fulfillment of the Jewish ordinance, and probably on many other subjects of which we have no account.
2. What is the logical outcome of the Church's right to give commandments?
It has a two-fold result; a result affecting the Church itself, and a result affecting us.
If the Church has the power to give commandments she must also have the power to enforce their observance, and to punish those who transgress them.
If a teacher has the right to impose tasks upon his pupils and exact the performance of them no one would dispute that he must also be entitled to ascertain that these tasks are really performed; nor can the further right to punish the lazy and negligence students be denied him.
If the State has the power to issue laws, then its right to enforce their observance by means of the services of the police, and to punish those who offend against them, follows as a natural consequence.
Laws would be meaningless, the authority of the State would become a mockery, if the right to issue edicts was not backed up by the power to enforce them and to punish those who transgress them; the sword of justice would be blunted, indeed.
A king not only wears a crown on his head, the symbol of the highest authority which alone has the right to command; he also holds in his hand the scepter, the emblem of punitive authority.
The order of things in the Church is the same. The Son of God has given her all power, not only to give commandments, but to watch over their observance and to punish those who disobey them. Priests are punished by being pronounced unworthy or incapable of saying Mass, the further exercise of their sacred office is forbidden them, they are declared unfit for the ministry, and are expelled from the ranks of the clergy.
Rebellious laymen are denied the sacraments and the participation in the Holy Sacrifice. The Church does not recoil when punishment is necessary, but she does not punished too severely, only with drawing that of which the offender has made himself a unworthy, and only punishes for such time as he refuses to amend; she punishes with the object of converting. She has the right to punish and she exercises that right; for this reason, just as a king wields a scepter, St. Peter holds the keys, and a Bishop carries a shepherd staff in his hand.
Out of the right to give commandments arises for the Church also the right to insist on their being observed, and to punish those who disobey them. But for us, too, there is a result. What is it? For us there results the obligation to keep them; if the Church has received this right to give commandments from Christ it follows that if we wish to please Him we must fulfill these commandments. "He that hears you hears Me; he that despises you despises Me."
The matter is clear. In is folly to say: "Yes, we know we must obey the commandments of God, but we are not obliged to obey the commandments of the Church or her Bishops; they are framed to by men, and are merely human inventions; one may be a very good Christian and yet disregard them." It is also gravely sinful to say this or hold this view.
The commandments of the Church are certainly the work of men, but of men who stand at the very head of the Church; God's representatives empowered by Christ to make laws and commandments.
Is it not the duty of a child to obey his parents? Most certainly. Why? Because it is the will of God. Is a citizen not under an obligation to submit to the laws of the State? Certainly. And why? Because of all lawful authority derives its power from God. How, then, can we refuse obedience to the Church, which has been so clearly and expressly charged to make and issue commandments?
Let us, therefore, obey the commandments of the Church. They are neither numerous nor hard to follow; they are framed by a gentle mother, who asks of her children only what is for their good.
All pious and faithful Christians are agreed that it is a grievous sin and a grave matter to disobey deliberately a commandment of the Church or a directive of a Bishop. Love of our Savior, of the Church, of our neighbor, the horror of sin, solicitude for our salvation are the motives which should lead us to keep faithfully the laws wisely made for the kingdom of Christ upon earth.
[Adapted from Popular Sermons on the Catechism, Fr. Humbert Bamberg, Volume 2, Sermon 39, (1914)]
Lunch crowd challenges Archbishop Chaput
Verbal fisticuffs broke out Tuesday between Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput and a luncheon audience that challenged him to defend the church's role in public life.Great answer!...I usually hold that there are no stupid questions, but at times, people deliberately contrive questions in an attempt to provoke confrontation.
"Why do (religions) feel they have to impose their views on us?" asked one woman during a spirited question-and-answer session following Chaput's speech to the City Club of Denver.
"If we don't - you'll impose your views on us," Chaput shot back to murmurs from the group of about 120 business and civic leaders.
One questioner observed that the Catholic Church doesn't appear to care about protecting women hurt by unwanted pregnancies.Another great answer!
His voice rising, Chaput replied, "That dear baby who gets aborted is who I'm protecting. Somebody doesn't just get hurt with abortion - they get killed."
"Who will take care of the unwanted children?" another asked.
"I'll take any child that's unwanted and find them a home and take care of the mother," he said. "You have my personal pledge on that."
More here...
Gospel for Thursday, 3rd Week of Lent
Luke 11:14-23
The Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Satan
[14] Now Jesus was casting out a demon that was dumb; when the demon had gone out, the man spoke, and the people marvelled. [15] But some of them said, "He casts out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons"; [16] while others, to test Him, sought from Him a sign from Heaven. [17] But He, knowing their thoughts, said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and house falls upon house. [18] And if Satan also is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For you say that I cast out demons by Beelzebul. [19] And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. [20] But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you. [21] When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace; [22] but when one stronger than he assails him and overcomes him, he takes away his armor in which he trusted, and divides his spoil. [23] He who is not with Me is against Me, and He who does not gather with Me scatters."
**********************************
Commentary:
14-23. Jesus' enemies remain obstinate despite the evidence of the miracle. Since they cannot deny that He has done something quite extraordinary, they attribute it to the power of the devil, rather than admit that Jesus is the Messiah. Our Lord answers them with a clinching argument: the fact that He expels demons is proof that He has brought the Kingdom of God. The Second Vatican Council reminds us of this truth: "The Lord Jesus inaugurated His Church by preaching the Good News, that is, the coming of the Kingdom of God, promised over the ages in the Scriptures [...]. The miracles of Jesus also demonstrate that the Kingdom has already come on earth: `If it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you' (Luke 11:20; cf. Matthew 12:28). But principally the Kingdom of God is revealed in the person of Christ Himself, Son of God and Son of Man, who came `to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many' (Mark 10:45)" (Vatican II, "Lumen Gentium", 5).
The strong man well armed is the devil, who has enslaved man; but Jesus Christ, one stronger than he, has come and conquered him and is despoiling him. St. Paul will say that Christ "disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them" (Colossians 2:15).
After the victory of Christ, the "stronger one", the words of verse 23 are addressed to mankind at large; even if people do not want to recognize it, Jesus Christ has conquered and from now on no one can adopt an attitude of neutrality towards Him: he who is not with Him is against Him.
18. Christ's argument is very clear. One of the worst evils that can overtake the Church is disunity among Christians, disunity among believers. We must make Jesus' prayer our own: "That they may be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that also may be one in Us, so that the world may believe that Thou has sent Me" (John 17:21).
******************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
The Kingdom of God and the Kingdom of Satan
[14] Now Jesus was casting out a demon that was dumb; when the demon had gone out, the man spoke, and the people marvelled. [15] But some of them said, "He casts out demons by Beelzebul, the prince of demons"; [16] while others, to test Him, sought from Him a sign from Heaven. [17] But He, knowing their thoughts, said to them, "Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and house falls upon house. [18] And if Satan also is divided against himself, how will his kingdom stand? For you say that I cast out demons by Beelzebul. [19] And if I cast out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. [20] But if it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you. [21] When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace; [22] but when one stronger than he assails him and overcomes him, he takes away his armor in which he trusted, and divides his spoil. [23] He who is not with Me is against Me, and He who does not gather with Me scatters."
**********************************
Commentary:
14-23. Jesus' enemies remain obstinate despite the evidence of the miracle. Since they cannot deny that He has done something quite extraordinary, they attribute it to the power of the devil, rather than admit that Jesus is the Messiah. Our Lord answers them with a clinching argument: the fact that He expels demons is proof that He has brought the Kingdom of God. The Second Vatican Council reminds us of this truth: "The Lord Jesus inaugurated His Church by preaching the Good News, that is, the coming of the Kingdom of God, promised over the ages in the Scriptures [...]. The miracles of Jesus also demonstrate that the Kingdom has already come on earth: `If it is by the finger of God that I cast out demons, then the Kingdom of God has come upon you' (Luke 11:20; cf. Matthew 12:28). But principally the Kingdom of God is revealed in the person of Christ Himself, Son of God and Son of Man, who came `to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many' (Mark 10:45)" (Vatican II, "Lumen Gentium", 5).
The strong man well armed is the devil, who has enslaved man; but Jesus Christ, one stronger than he, has come and conquered him and is despoiling him. St. Paul will say that Christ "disarmed the principalities and powers and made a public example of them, triumphing over them" (Colossians 2:15).
After the victory of Christ, the "stronger one", the words of verse 23 are addressed to mankind at large; even if people do not want to recognize it, Jesus Christ has conquered and from now on no one can adopt an attitude of neutrality towards Him: he who is not with Him is against Him.
18. Christ's argument is very clear. One of the worst evils that can overtake the Church is disunity among Christians, disunity among believers. We must make Jesus' prayer our own: "That they may be one; even as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that also may be one in Us, so that the world may believe that Thou has sent Me" (John 17:21).
******************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
Another Take On Bishop Lynch's Statement
Terri’s Bishop Issues Bizarre Statement
Implies Schindlers should accept her imminent death and reconcile with her killer
I do not understand why this attempt to murder this woman is not condemned loudly and emphatically as a grave evil. Silence and weak platitudes are cowardly - and they convey the wrong message, not only to the faithful who are looking longingly for strong leadership as an example for encouragement and direction but also to the general public who also could benefit by good example.
Who would willingly become a martyr to defend the faith, to defend the natural moral law? Who would, because of fear of retribution, or fear of human respect, cower and hide from the truth? Where are those who are willing to be courageous witnesses in this age of death and moral decay?
May God bless Terri, her parents, Fr Johansen, and all those, too numerous to mention, who are being courageous witnesses today. May God give those who are weak the courage to do what it right before it is too late.
Implies Schindlers should accept her imminent death and reconcile with her killer
ST. PETERSBURG, March 2, 2005 (LifeSitenews.com) - For some time now, pro-life Catholics fighting to save the life of Terri Schiavo, have been clamouring for a statement or intervention by the bishop of St. Petersburg Florida, Terri’s home diocese. Now that such a statement has finally been made, the same pro-lifers might well be wishing Bishop Robert N. Lynch had maintained his silence.Rest of article.
The Florida Catholic Bishops’ conference has stated plainly that Terri’s means of receiving food and water does not constitute ‘extraordinary’ means of preserving her life, and is a simple requirement of ordinary care. Bishop Lynch, a signatory to that statement, has in a statement of his own, implied that Terri is at death’s door, and indicates that his only concern is the lack of “peace” between her estranged husband Michael Schiavo and her parents.
I do not understand why this attempt to murder this woman is not condemned loudly and emphatically as a grave evil. Silence and weak platitudes are cowardly - and they convey the wrong message, not only to the faithful who are looking longingly for strong leadership as an example for encouragement and direction but also to the general public who also could benefit by good example.
Who would willingly become a martyr to defend the faith, to defend the natural moral law? Who would, because of fear of retribution, or fear of human respect, cower and hide from the truth? Where are those who are willing to be courageous witnesses in this age of death and moral decay?
May God bless Terri, her parents, Fr Johansen, and all those, too numerous to mention, who are being courageous witnesses today. May God give those who are weak the courage to do what it right before it is too late.
Where Are the Catholic Priests, Pro-Life Group Wonders
(CNSNews.com) - The American Life League says now is the time for Roman Catholic priests -- especially Terri Schindler Schiavo's own bishop -- to offer prayers for Terri's safety.Fr. Rob Johansen has long been involved in this case says:
"Bishop Robert Lynch of St. Petersburg and his brother bishops across Florida and the rest of the United States must not let Terri die a painful death while they quietly sit by and do nothing," said Judie Brown, president of American Life League.
Brown says every Catholic priest should be "preaching from the pulpits on why one can never remove food and water from a person whose death is not imminent."
Where have been the bishops out at the hospice with those keeping vigil? Where have been the bishops appearing before the press, and urging Catholics to stand up against this? There have been precious few priests, and most of those from outside of Florida.
Why can't the bishops just come out and say "This is wrong". We know what the Church's teaching is...Why won't the bishops say it?
More here.
How to Celebrate a Mass "Not an Academic Question"
Cardinal Arinze Says It Should Motivate the Faithful to ReturnMore.
VATICAN CITY, MARCH 2, 2005 (Zenit.org).- Mass should be celebrated in such a way that it nourishes faith and gives people the "desire to return the next Sunday or even every day," says a Vatican official.
Cardinal Francis Arinze, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments, made that comment on Vatican Radio as a meeting on liturgy got under way.
...
The meeting's three main topics are the art of celebrating the Eucharist, the preaching of homilies, and proper liturgical formation.
A Response to St Stanislaus Spokesman, Mr. Bach
This response comes from Ewa Dyk, who is one of the signatories to the Appeal Letter at the top of the page. I reformatted it slightly foes ease of reading on the web page.
Source.
I am responding to An "Interesting Conversation"with Polish STL(R.Bach?) and I must say that after reading Mr. Bach's comments regarding our group of parishioners from St. Stanislaus Kostka Church in St.Louis, I felt as much amused as I felt flattered.To quote Bill O'Reilly, "What say you, Mr. Bach?"
One cannot treat seriously the merits of his arguments. On the other hand, it is very flattering to hear from a native speaker of English that our letter, from foreign born parishioners, is so compelling that he refuses to believe its origin. We passed the ultimate test of proficiency in the English Language, I guess. Thank you Mr. Bach.
Ewa Dyk
P.S.
This message is for Mr. R. Bach: We will be happy to help you in the art of letter writing in English.
Source.
In Light of the Supreme Court & the Ten Commandments
DID YOU KNOW?
As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U.S. Supreme Court you can see, near the top of the building, a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing the one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view ...
It is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments.
DID YOU KNOW?
As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door?
DID YOU KNOW?
As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall, right above where the Supreme Court judges sit, a display of the Ten Commandments?
DID YOU KNOW?
James Madison, the fourth president, known as "The Father of Our Constitution" made the following statement:
Patrick Henry, that patriot and Founding Father of our country said:
The very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said:
********************
From an E-Mail I received yesterday.
As you walk up the steps to the building which houses the U.S. Supreme Court you can see, near the top of the building, a row of the world's law givers and each one is facing the one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view ...
It is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments.
DID YOU KNOW?
As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge oak doors have the Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door?
DID YOU KNOW?
As you sit inside the courtroom, you can see the wall, right above where the Supreme Court judges sit, a display of the Ten Commandments?
DID YOU KNOW?
James Madison, the fourth president, known as "The Father of Our Constitution" made the following statement:
"We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God."DID YOU KNOW?
Patrick Henry, that patriot and Founding Father of our country said:
"It cannot be emphasized too strongly or too often that this great nation was founded not by religionists but by Christians, not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ".DID YOU KNOW?
The very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said:
"Americans should select and prefer Christians as their rulers."How, then, have we gotten to the point that everything we have done for 220 years in this country is now suddenly wrong and unconstitutional?
********************
From an E-Mail I received yesterday.
Letter to the Editor: A Confused & Disgruntled Individual
Pick your pewThe problems within the Church have been occurring for considerably longer than the past 6 years. We witnessed in recent decades an exodus from the Church, not only by the laity but of thousands upon thousands of priests and religious. It's presumptuous to state that this is due to the actions of the Church - it is due to the actions of those within and outside the Church. It is due to the failures and frailties of individuals, and not the Church.
Oakville-Mehlville Journal
After the January 1999 Papal visit to St. Louis there was a sense of excitement and spirit of enthusiasm. Almost everyone had something very positive to say about the great impact of the pastoral visit of Pope John Paul II to the Archdiocese of St. Louis. On a Sunday morning you could hardly find a pew in church for which to seat your entire family
Now, six years later you can have your pick of any pew you want in church. Why? Because, over the years the Catholic Church has continued to fail its parishioners. Little by little the actions of the Church have eroded the unity of those who stood by, built and supported the Archdiocese.
As an example, a friend of mine who is divorced has been banned from receiving the Sacrament of Communion. The divorce is of no fault of hers (the husband abandoned the family). Her attempt to inquire about receiving an annulment was met with a dollar sign. Yes, you could obtain an annulment for a hefty price. Most of us know individuals in this situation.If the facts are as stated, then this is incorrect. A divorced person is not banned from Holy Communion by the fact the he is divorced. However, if the person is "remarried" or cohabitating, then the person is not permitted to receive Holy Communion. Christ teaches us, and His Church maintains, that marriage is for life.
With respect to the seeking of a decree of nullity, the fees are necessary because of the costs of adjudicating the case. There are costs associated with maintenance, utilities, salaries and such. However, there are normally provisions for monthly payments and in some cases, the costs may be waived.
This past year we heard about an 8-year-old girl who suffers from a rare digestive disorder and cannot eat wheat wafers. After the church's pastor refused to allow a substitute wafer, a priest at a nearby parish volunteered to offer one, and in May, the child wore a white Communion dress, and received the sacrament alongside her mother, who had not taken Communion since she herself was diagnosed with the disease. Recently, the diocese told the priest that the church would not validate the child's sacrament because of the substitute wafer.This paragraph leads me to believe that Frank Longo is not a Catholic or, if he is a Catholic, he misunderstands the most basic theology of the Holy Eucharist. The Sacraments, as instituted by Christ Himself for the Church and His faithful, require the proper matter and form in order to be valid. The use of a rice wafer cannot substitute for wheat. Unfortunately, it seemed that the story last year was blown out of proportion, due to the apparent desire of the mother to make headlines for herself. The Church was right to correct the situation and, in her solicitude, offered valid alternatives (Holy Communion from the chalice containing the Precious Blood of our Lord, or by use of low gluten hosts which could be consecrated to become the Sacred Body of Jesus). The priest who ignored the mandates of Christ and His Church, was responsible for a grave disservice to this family and to the Church. Apparently, because of the publicity generated by this story, his failure caused untold damage to the Church, as witnessed in this letter.
On the local scene, there is the standoff of Archbishop Burke and the parishioners of St Stanislaus. I personally stand behind the parishioners. If liquidation is required, I would donate the money to a non-catholic church (i.e. Baptist, Lutheran, or Jewish). Perhaps consider giving the property and assets to the Reverend Larry Rice of the New Life Evangelistic Center.It is unfortunate that the Board of Directors of St. Stanislaus, with the helpful hand of the Post-Dispatch, has distorted this issue. Untold scandal and damage has been inflicted due to the flagrant disobedience, rebellion, and scandal of the actions taken by the board, in defiance of the Archbishop and the Holy See. We have yet to see the full results of this damage.
This past November we all saw how parishioners are being told how they must vote.On second thought, this letter may be from a professed "Catholic" - One who seeks to lay, at the door of the Church, all of his doubts and frustrations. And this may be fine, provided one do all one can to enlighten oneself to the truth and be prepared to offer assent, even to those things which are not understood.
Archbishop Rigali and his minions tried to shuffle under the carpet the sex abuse by priest and nuns. This is the straw that broke the camel's back. The saga of the pedophile priest has encouraged the parishioners to close their wallets, which is now the only action that gets the attention of the archdiocese.
The Catholic Church has failed its parishioners. You can see this documented fact by being able to pick your own pew.
Frank Longo
Crestwood
This letter is laced with unfounded accusations and blame. Much of it seems to be standard boilerplate rhetoric which we have seen many times before. Admittedly, there can be some blame properly attributed to some Church leaders for failing to ecercise their duties to teach, but one cannot blame the Church, herself. And, all of us may bear some responsibility for the problems facing the Church, as well. How so?
Perhaps, by our failure to stand up for the truth - choosing instead to not get involved.
Perhaps, by our reluctance to teach ourselves so that we might have been able to teach our children the beauty of Christ, His Church, and the Faith which we profess to have.
Perhaps, by our failures to be more diligent in our prayer life.
It is sad to witness a person such as this letter writer, who has been so negatively affected by the incidents he cites in his letter. Perhaps, some of us are not praying enough and not setting a proper example? I just don't know.
Source.
Town Talk, Mar 2: Anti-Catholic Bigotry?
Nazi hatemongersOf course, they see nothing wrong with what they do. They're engaged in service to the community - the service of the Evil One, it seems.
WE AS A society have learned nothing from our past. The Journal has become an absolute promoter of hate. Every week, you print some people's anti-Catholic comments in Town Talk. You've become like the Nazi papers of World War II Germany the way you print this paper garbage.
I wonder if you changed the word Catholic to perhaps African-American what kind of reaction you would get. Catholics do more around the world to help poor and needy than any other religion. These lying, anti-Catholics know nothing about this wonderful, peaceful religion. Stop printing hate and try to learn what it is to be Catholic.
Will they stop? It'll never happen. The servant is no greater than the Master. Since those of the world ridiculed, persecuted, and killed our Lord, they will do the same to us. Nonetheless, we should pray for the conversion of those whose lives are consumed by hatred and bigotry.
Source.
Cardinal Arinze comments on the Linz Liturgical Scandal
The prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, one of the highest-ranking Cardinals of the Curia comments on the liturgical chaos in Linz. Cardinal Arinze states that his congregation will make every effort in order to stop these abuses.Article here.
Prime Minister does not deserve Communion, Bishop says
TORONTO - The Catholic Bishop of Calgary says if it was up to him, he would consider excommunicating Paul Martin over his government's plan to legalize same-sex marriage.Source.
Bishop Fred Henry said yesterday the Prime Minister's political views clash so severely with the teachings of the Catholic Church that he no longer deserves to receive Communion.
National unCatholic Reporter Faults Bishop Bruskewitz...
and the Bishops in general...
I suppose NCR would have no problems if one were to refer to it as an "extreme example of sewage"?
One bishop, Fabian Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Neb., refused to even participate in the Gavin Group’s work. He’s an extreme example of obstructionism, but not the only one. And it is clear that the other bishops have no way to call him to account.An "extreme example of obstructionism"? They fail to state who the others are.
I suppose NCR would have no problems if one were to refer to it as an "extreme example of sewage"?
Is the La Crosse Tribune Trying to Schmooze Bishop Listecki?
They seemed to have no kind words for Archbishop Burke.
Source.
Another article, however, shares this interesting story about Bishop Listecki and Archbishop Burke:
Today we offer a hearty welcome and our best wishes to Bishop Jerome Listecki, who on Tuesday was installed as the spiritual and organizational leader of the Catholic Diocese of La Crosse.Perhaps others could comment on how long this support will last?
...
Listecki inherits a diocese with no shortage of challenges. Local Catholics have been wrestling recently with their school system, attempting to match resources to educational desires. One elementary school will close this spring as the system deals with funding shortfalls.
The new bishop also will be leading a flock divided in some regard by the policies, practices and priorities set forth by former Bishop Raymond Burke, now the archbishop in St. Louis. We would never presume to advise Listecki on how to best pick up the mantle left by his predecessor. We will, however, encourage the Catholic community throughout the diocese to support and uphold their new leader. (my emphasis)
Source.
Another article, however, shares this interesting story about Bishop Listecki and Archbishop Burke:
[Bishop] Listecki, a Chicago native, said he and another priest were traveling to Winona, Minn., for a meeting Feb. 22, 1995, when they decided to stop and see Burke installed.Source.
"Arriving at the back of this beautiful cathedral, I was quickly met at the door by a vigilant Knight of Columbus who blocked my entrance and demanded a ticket," Listecki recalled in his homily Tuesday.
"Having no ticket, I was told that I could stand in the vestibule. I did so willingly, stretching my neck to catch a glimpse of my friend Bishop Burke on this glorious day for the church of La Crosse. ...
Holy Father Speaks to Cardinal Ratzinger
VATICAN CITY (AP) - Pope John Paul II managed to speak in two languages with a top Vatican official Tuesday, the first clear sign the pontiff was regaining his voice after throat surgery.The Wednesday audience has been cancelled, but it is encouraging that he appears to be getting better.
The meeting with Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger reinforced Vatican statements that the 84-year-old pope was making strides in vocal and respiratory therapy less than a week after receiving a breathing tube. It also sent a message that John Paul can remain engaged in key church affairs from his 10th-floor suite at Rome's Gemelli Polyclinic hospital.
"The pope spoke with me in German and in Italian," said Ratzinger, a German who runs a powerful Vatican office that deals with issues of Roman Catholic doctrine. "I am happy to say that the Holy Father is fully alert mentally and also able to say the essential things with his voice."
Source.
Gospel for Wednesday, 3rd Week of Lent
Matthew 5:17-19
Jesus and His Teaching, the Fulfillment of the Law
(Jesus said to His disciples,) [17] "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. [18] For truly I say to you, till Heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. [19] Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven."
****************
Commentary:
17-19. In this passage Jesus stresses the perennial value of the Old Testament. It is the word of God; because it has a divine authority it deserves total respect. The Old Law enjoined precepts of a moral, legal and liturgical type. Its moral precepts still hold good in the New Testament because they are for the most part specific divine-positive promulgations of the natural law. However, our Lord gives them greater weight and meaning. But the legal and liturgical precepts of the Old Law were laid down by God for a specific stage in salvation history, that is, up to the coming of Christ; Christians are not obliged to observe them (cf. "Summa Theologiae", I-II, q. 108, a. 3 ad 3).
The law promulgated through Moses and explained by the prophets was God's gift to His people, a kind of anticipation of the definitive Law which the Christ or Messiah would lay down. Thus, as the Council of Trent defined, Jesus not only "was given to men as a redeemer in whom they are to trust, but also as a lawgiver whom they are to obey" ("De Iustificatione", can. 21).
*****************************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Jesus and His Teaching, the Fulfillment of the Law
(Jesus said to His disciples,) [17] "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them. [18] For truly I say to you, till Heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the law until all is accomplished. [19] Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the Kingdom of Heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven."
****************
Commentary:
17-19. In this passage Jesus stresses the perennial value of the Old Testament. It is the word of God; because it has a divine authority it deserves total respect. The Old Law enjoined precepts of a moral, legal and liturgical type. Its moral precepts still hold good in the New Testament because they are for the most part specific divine-positive promulgations of the natural law. However, our Lord gives them greater weight and meaning. But the legal and liturgical precepts of the Old Law were laid down by God for a specific stage in salvation history, that is, up to the coming of Christ; Christians are not obliged to observe them (cf. "Summa Theologiae", I-II, q. 108, a. 3 ad 3).
The law promulgated through Moses and explained by the prophets was God's gift to His people, a kind of anticipation of the definitive Law which the Christ or Messiah would lay down. Thus, as the Council of Trent defined, Jesus not only "was given to men as a redeemer in whom they are to trust, but also as a lawgiver whom they are to obey" ("De Iustificatione", can. 21).
*****************************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Tuesday, March 01, 2005
20 Signs of Trouble in a New Religious Group
Since the closing of the Second Vatican Council, a number of new groups have arisen within the Church. Whereas many new groups start off on the right foot and maintain solid footing, others fall by the wayside. This may be due to poor doctrine or questionable practices.Great article by Pete Vere.
...
Several years ago, Fr. [Francis] Morrisey proposed 15 criteria, or warning signs, when evaluating new associations within the Church. While these warning signs are not law per se — that is, law in the sense of legislation — most canonists accept these criteria as a solid guide when examining and assessing new associations within the Church. For those with access to a good ecclesiastical library, Fr. Morrisey presents and explains these fifteen criteria in his article “Canonical Associations...” published in Informationes, vol. 26, (2000), pp 88-109.
Monitoring "Jerry Springer: The Opera"
The Catholic League has been monitoring plans to bring “Jerry Springer: The Opera” to Broadway for some time, but has refrained from saying anything because the initial plans were scrapped. However, it is being reported today that if the producers can come up with the cash, they will bring “Springer” to Broadway in spring 2006.You can more about it here. Donohue is right - if the reports are correct, it is satanic.
Catholic League president William Donohue commented as follows:
“This show is Satanic and will be met with a massive protest if the producers are dumb enough to bring it to New York. Having been galvanized by Mel Gibson’s ‘The Passion,’ and having been successfully mobilized last fall during the electoral season, Christians have more energy and confidence these days than they’ve had in years. Anyone who thinks Catholics and Protestants are going to put up with organized hate speech is nuts. All they need is some leadership, and we and our allies will provide it.”
Santo Domingo Cardinal Says no Gays in Seminaries
SANTO DOMINGO, Dominican Republic, Mar. 1 (CWNews.com/LifeSiteNews.com) - Cardinal Nicolas de Jesus Lopez Rodriguez of Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, reaffirmed this week that the Church does not discriminate against homosexuals, but that they do not belong in seminaries.
SLU V_Monologues Followup
The following is part of a follow-up email sent to Mr Serafino by Mr. John Horvat, regarding our St. Louis University protest...
*******************************
Salve Maria!
I heard that at the CPAC conference in Washington there were several SLU students there who said they saw and applauded our protest although none of them had the courage to join.
In Jesu et Maria,
John Horvat
*******************************
CPAC is a College focused campaign of the American TFP based in Washington D.C.
While is is unfortunate that these students lacked the courage to join us, it is at the same time encouraging news. We will most likely have to protest V-Days again next year as the administration at SLU is unlikely to stop production of the play. With our experience from this year, we can try to make contacts with students within the University with the hope of enlisting them on the sidewalk with us in 2006. Additionally, we will have much more time to plan the protest and to attract a larger crowd in our favor.
As Thomas McKenna (V.P. of the American TFP) stated; although we were only 21 in number, thousands of people saw the story on the TV News which while presented in the classic 'covering all sides' style, allowed our point of view to be publically aired. In addition we were given exposure in the St. Louis University campus newspaper which has a circulation of over 7000 (one would presume Father Biondi is among the readers) shining even more light on this issue within the campus.
Let's pray that Father Biondi is moved by Grace to cancel any further participation with this event, and if he does not respond to Grace, that we will be further strenghtened to fight this outrage with renewed fervor.
In Jesu et Maria,
Mark Serafino
Details of What Will Happen toTerri Schindler-Schiavo on March 18
An E-Mail received this evening.
**************************************
Dear Friend of Terri Schindler-Schiavo,
First of all let me thank you on behalf of Terri for your interest and prayers for her well-being. Those prayers were answered last Friday when Judge Greer extended her "stay of execution" by three weeks.
The sad news is that Judge Greer ordered Terri to death by dehydration and starvation beginning March 18th at 1:00 EST. This would be a horrible death, a pitiless form of execution that wouldn't be done to a pet. Please see the "exit protocol" that was prepared for Terri that reveals how much she will suffer. Below I have included the physical details of what happens to the human body during death by dehydration.
What Judge Greer wants done to Terri is truly cruel and inhumane. Prisoners on death row are treated with more dignity and respect.
But we are doing our very best to prevent this from happening to Terri. We are working in Tallahassee with legislators to pass a new Terri's Law that would save her life and others like Terri. Our coalition is also striving in Clearwater to expose the hypocrisy of Judge Greer and Terri's husband Michael. The legal team is among the best lawyers in the country, and there is still hope in redressing Terri's case.
********************************************
Death by Dehydration
As dehydration increases, signs and symptoms develop. These include: thirst, restless or irritable behavior, decreased skin turgor, dry mucous membranes, sunken eyes, and absence of tears when crying vigorously.
Symptoms of early or mild dehydration include:
flushed face
extreme thirst, more than normal or unable to drink
dry, warm skin
cannot pass urine or reduced amounts, dark, yellow
dizziness and weakness
cramping in the arms and legs
crying with few or no tears
sleepy or irritable
headaches
dry mouth, dry tongue; with thick saliva
Symptoms of moderate to severe dehydration include:
low blood pressure
fainting
severe muscle contractions in the arms, legs, stomach, and back
convulsions
a bloated stomach
heart failure
sunken dry eyes, with few or no tears
skin loses its firmness and looks wrinkled (when a bit of skin lifted up stays folded and takes a long time to go back to its normal position)
rapid and deep breathing - faster than normal
fast, weak pulse
In severe dehydration, these effects become more pronounced and the patient may develop evidence of hypovolaemic shock, including:
diminished consciousness,
lack of urine output,
cool moist extremities,
a rapid and feeble pulse (the radial pulse may be undetectable),
low or undetectable blood pressure, and
peripheral cyanosis (bluish color of the skin from lack of oxygenation).
Death follows.
**************************************
Dear Friend of Terri Schindler-Schiavo,
First of all let me thank you on behalf of Terri for your interest and prayers for her well-being. Those prayers were answered last Friday when Judge Greer extended her "stay of execution" by three weeks.
The sad news is that Judge Greer ordered Terri to death by dehydration and starvation beginning March 18th at 1:00 EST. This would be a horrible death, a pitiless form of execution that wouldn't be done to a pet. Please see the "exit protocol" that was prepared for Terri that reveals how much she will suffer. Below I have included the physical details of what happens to the human body during death by dehydration.
What Judge Greer wants done to Terri is truly cruel and inhumane. Prisoners on death row are treated with more dignity and respect.
But we are doing our very best to prevent this from happening to Terri. We are working in Tallahassee with legislators to pass a new Terri's Law that would save her life and others like Terri. Our coalition is also striving in Clearwater to expose the hypocrisy of Judge Greer and Terri's husband Michael. The legal team is among the best lawyers in the country, and there is still hope in redressing Terri's case.
********************************************
Death by Dehydration
As dehydration increases, signs and symptoms develop. These include: thirst, restless or irritable behavior, decreased skin turgor, dry mucous membranes, sunken eyes, and absence of tears when crying vigorously.
Symptoms of early or mild dehydration include:
flushed face
extreme thirst, more than normal or unable to drink
dry, warm skin
cannot pass urine or reduced amounts, dark, yellow
dizziness and weakness
cramping in the arms and legs
crying with few or no tears
sleepy or irritable
headaches
dry mouth, dry tongue; with thick saliva
Symptoms of moderate to severe dehydration include:
low blood pressure
fainting
severe muscle contractions in the arms, legs, stomach, and back
convulsions
a bloated stomach
heart failure
sunken dry eyes, with few or no tears
skin loses its firmness and looks wrinkled (when a bit of skin lifted up stays folded and takes a long time to go back to its normal position)
rapid and deep breathing - faster than normal
fast, weak pulse
In severe dehydration, these effects become more pronounced and the patient may develop evidence of hypovolaemic shock, including:
diminished consciousness,
lack of urine output,
cool moist extremities,
a rapid and feeble pulse (the radial pulse may be undetectable),
low or undetectable blood pressure, and
peripheral cyanosis (bluish color of the skin from lack of oxygenation).
Death follows.
An 'Interesting Conversation" with PolishSTL (R Bach?)
>
*** Updated *** I added limited color to make this easier to read. Comments by "PolishSTL" are in BLUE.
A person using an ID of "PolishSTL" recently posted the following in response to my postings of 1) the Appeal (by Faithful Members of St Stanislaus) and 2) a response on the number of people "in exile", so to speak.
I have separated the post by "PolishSTL" into segments for ease of reading and for my response (I made no changes, but left the post as is, except for the separations):
I further stated, as a point of clarification: The signatories to the Appeal Letter above are: Andrzej Blek, Danuta Krol, Teresa Blek, Basia Najarro, Jarek Czernikiewicz, Joe Skudrsyk, Ewa Dyk, and Bozena Skudrzyk.
Also, for some reason, it is said that those 'in exile' (numbering 60, remember) "could not write such a letter without intervention or assistance". There are any number of assumptions one could make here.
1) The Archdiocese is behind the letter.
2) The Archdiocese helped in composing the letter.
3) The 60 are incapable of writing such a letter, or
4) Maybe our Lord inspired them to write it.
"PolishSTL" leaves us in the dark why we should not accept this letter which is signed by eight people representing the faithful of St. Stanislaus.
My actual response to "PolishSTL" was
Two different versions. Not too surprising.
"PolishSTL" signs his post:
One of the objectives in covering this issue has been to show "up close and personal", the flagrant disrepect for, and at times, the malice toward Abp. Burke that exists here and to try to provide the necessary information one would need in arriving at the truth. I, personally, did not need to know all of the details as Archbishop Burke's words and directives are sufficient for me. I see it as a matter of humility and obedience. The information and facts only confirmed what in humility and faith, I already knew.
Source.
*** Updated *** I added limited color to make this easier to read. Comments by "PolishSTL" are in BLUE.
A person using an ID of "PolishSTL" recently posted the following in response to my postings of 1) the Appeal (by Faithful Members of St Stanislaus) and 2) a response on the number of people "in exile", so to speak.
I have separated the post by "PolishSTL" into segments for ease of reading and for my response (I made no changes, but left the post as is, except for the separations):
There is no 'lrslattery' on the parish roles & tell the truth as to who wrote the letter.First, I never claimed to write the letter nor did I claim to be a parishioner. When I posted the Appeal Letter at FreeRepublic, I said: I received this via email this evening. It comes from those parishioners "in exile", so to speak. These are people who know first-hand what's going on...Maybe those who are so quick to judge Archbishop Burke might learn something from these people.
I further stated, as a point of clarification: The signatories to the Appeal Letter above are: Andrzej Blek, Danuta Krol, Teresa Blek, Basia Najarro, Jarek Czernikiewicz, Joe Skudrsyk, Ewa Dyk, and Bozena Skudrzyk.
The, at most, 60 (not 150-200) could not write such a letter without intervention or assistance.Remember the number "60". The 150-200 number was what I used in a followup posting as a count of those "in exile". This was stated as a guess, yet to be verified...
Also, for some reason, it is said that those 'in exile' (numbering 60, remember) "could not write such a letter without intervention or assistance". There are any number of assumptions one could make here.
1) The Archdiocese is behind the letter.
2) The Archdiocese helped in composing the letter.
3) The 60 are incapable of writing such a letter, or
4) Maybe our Lord inspired them to write it.
"PolishSTL" leaves us in the dark why we should not accept this letter which is signed by eight people representing the faithful of St. Stanislaus.
My actual response to "PolishSTL" was
What is the insinuation here? Do you mean to say that they are incapable of writing an eloquent letter? Do they lack the mental prowess for such an undertaking? Do they not have a sufficient grasp of the English language? Please clarify yourself - tell us what you mean."PolishSTL" continues:
In adition, 150-200 signatures contains a large gap of 50!Caught me! I was deliberately (sarcasm intended) inflating the figures - cooking the books, so to speak! Mea culpa! Nevertheless, I now know that 200 minus 150 equals 50!
The 10-11 families were not exiled, they left with the ADMINISTRATOR after no explainations for questionable expendatures caused him to lose signatory rights to the operating account.I'm not certain how to get 60 parishioners from 10-11 families unless we're talking about 5-6 people per family and all being counted in the 60 number from above. Furthermore, I have no way to verify the veracity of this claim. In light of the inadequate information at my disposal, I cannot comment on this. Perhaps someone with details could provide them?
Annulments, jobs, and other monetary considerations have been provided to those 60 in exchange for their WORK against the parishioners of St. Stanislaus.Now, I must admit that I'm confused again...It is being alleged that the "60" are receiving annulments and jobs from the Archdiocese as a means to garner their support, and I suppose that those who cannot work or have no need of seeking an annulment are just paid cash or receive other unspecified benefits. This, of course, allows them to work against those who work against the Church...It's a novel idea. And, of course, we have seen nothing to prove, much less support, these goofy allegations.
THERE HAS BEEN A 3RD PARTY AUDIT CONDUCTED AND EVERYTHING WAS FINE!!! (FOR THE UPTEENTH TIME).This statement, while somewhat ambiguous, conflicts with this statement by other parishioners: "...the Board refused to provide a complete detailed written report of all the financial accounts of the parish. As far as we know, the Corporation has never gone through an independent audit of all financial accounts it holds."
Two different versions. Not too surprising.
The individuals that left are NO LONGER parishioners of St. Stan's or St. John's. They are parishioners of St. Agatha's.Not worthy of a comment, mainly because I'm tired of listening to and reading about these rants. I'm still left wondering if the original articles and by-laws apply? Will "PolishSTL" answer that question?
"PolishSTL" signs his post:
R BACHI said in a post on another site that I have "no horse in this race." However, it doesn't seem right to sit by idly while forces are about attempting to impugn the integrity of Archbishop Burke, those with whom he works, or the faithful parishioners of St. Stanislaus.
One of the objectives in covering this issue has been to show "up close and personal", the flagrant disrepect for, and at times, the malice toward Abp. Burke that exists here and to try to provide the necessary information one would need in arriving at the truth. I, personally, did not need to know all of the details as Archbishop Burke's words and directives are sufficient for me. I see it as a matter of humility and obedience. The information and facts only confirmed what in humility and faith, I already knew.
Source.
Manifestations of Modernism
An excellent article by Peter Mirus which brings into focus a perspective about some of the things going on the Church today.
With the recent scandals in the Church, groups have arisen to try to address the need for Church reform. However, some proponents of “reform” are using the sex scandals to champion Modernist causes, demanding that the Church change both its divinely-instituted structure and its morality to adapt to the demands of the present generation.More here...
What Is Modernism?
Many of the proponents of “reform” in the Church are following the Modernist blueprint. Essentially, a Modernist is one who believes that the Church should adapt itself to the changing mindset of each generation; that the evolution of society requires an equally evolving system of faith and morality. But to argue that truth must remodel itself according to the demands of society is a fallacy
...
It is fairly apparent that to call oneself “Catholic” but to adhere to Modernist principles is an untenable position. The Modernist rejects several essential principles of the Catholic Faith – most importantly the dogmatic principle, that God’s revelation is both exceedingly specific and safeguarded by earthly successors to Christ who, by virtue of the Holy Spirit, are able to “bind” and “loose” with admirable precision. Thus, whenever popes teach something contrary to the Modernist creed, they are dismissed as outdated and, therefore, irrelevant.
Pope John Paul's General Prayer Intention for March
"That governments of every nation, in their policies and development plans, should always take account of the poor, emarginated and oppressed."Source.
His mission intention is: "That each individual Church should be aware of the ever greater urgency of preparing holy Christians, capable of confronting challenges to the new evangelization."
Last rites, cremation part of Schiavo battle
CLEARWATER - Attorneys for Terri Schiavo's parents are hoping for the best, but preparing for the worst.Source.
Even as they fight to extend Schiavo's life beyond the March 18 date that her feeding tube is scheduled to be removed, lawyers also filed motions Monday on her last rites and on whether Schiavo will be cremated or buried.
Lawyer David Gibbs III, representing Schiavo's parents, asked the court for several days of total hearing time to argue numerous motions, including other filings to get Schiavo experimental treatment and to remove her husband as her guardian.
Details, details, details...
The Archdiocese of St. Louis posted copies of the relevant documents regarding St. Stanislaus on it web site...Some of the interesting facts in these documents are these (and I'm not finished yet - this is just for starters):
The above excerpts are the same as those expressed in an Open Letter last October by a group of faithful St Stanislaus parishioners.
More to follow...
The Original Charter of the Corporation states, in part:It does make for interesting reading and it would appear that, as some have maintained throughout, that recent changes to by-laws may have been contrary to both the spirit and letter of the original charter and by-laws.
Article 5. (...)The person who shall be pastor of said Polish Roman Catholic St. Stanislaus Parish under the rules and regulations of such diocese of St. Louis shall, ex officio, be president of said corporation.
...
Article 7. In the event that said corporation be dissolved by reason of any nonuser of misuser of its corporate powers or for any other cause, then, and in that event, all property of said corporation, at the time of such dissolution, shall, subject to payment of corporate debts, become the absolute property of the individual who, at said time, shall be the Roman Catholic Archbishop of said Diocese of St. Louis.
The Original By-laws state:
First. The corporate powers of the corporation shall, under the laws of the State of Missouri, be exercised in conformity with the principles and disciplines of the Roman Catholic Church, and in accordance with such rules and regulations as may be establised from time to time, for the government of said church, by the Roman Catholic Archbishop in the Diocses of St. Louis, or by his authority.
Second. This corporation shall receive as its president such person as said Archbishop, or in his absence, the Vicar-General of said Diocese, or in his absence, the Administrator of said Diocese, may appoint as pastor of said parish...
Seventh. The pastor...shall have custody of all article used by him in the performance of Divine Service in said Church....He shall in no wise be prevented, hindered, or annoyed in the performance of his duties as such priest by said Board of Directors...
Twelveth. These by-laws cannot be changed or modified, nor ... shall any amendment be made at any time which shall in anywise be in conflict with any law of the State of Missouri, or with any rule , regulation or requirement of the said Diocese of St. Louis in force at the time of such proposed change.
The above excerpts are the same as those expressed in an Open Letter last October by a group of faithful St Stanislaus parishioners.
More to follow...
"A Patient in a Vegetative State Is a Human Person"
Interview With Dr. Gian Luigi Gigli, of a Catholic FederationMore.
ROME, FEB. 28, 2005 (Zenit.org).- The vegetative state is a "pejorative term" which implies lack of humanity, warns Dr. Gian Luigi Gigli, president of the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations.
Gigli is co-author with Dr. Nathan Zasler of the book "Life-Sustaining Treatments in Vegetative State: Scientific Advances and Ethical Dilemmas," reprinted in a special issue of the Neurorehabilitation review, published by Iospress. The book is the result of a congress on this topic.
Women Adopt Frozen Embryos, Save Them from Science
MADRID (Reuters) - A Spanish clinic that allows women to adopt frozen embryos to save them from scientific research said Monday 14 women were pregnant with adopted embryos.Watch the word...scheme...perhaps, it's innocent enough, but I still wonder...
The Barcelona clinic launched a scheme last year to allow embryos left over from fertility treatment and destined for stem cell research to be implanted into women.
More here
Gospel for Tuesday, 3rd Week of Lent
Matthew 18:21-35
Forgiveness of Injuries. The Parable of the Unforgiving Servant
[21] Then Peter came up and said to Him (Jesus), "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?" [22] Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.
[23] "Therefore the Kingdom of Heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants. [24] When he began the reckoning, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents; [25] and as he could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made. [26] So the servant fell on his knees, imploring him, 'Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.' [27] And out of pity for him the lord of that servant released him and forgave him the debt. [28] But that same servant, as he went out, came upon one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and seizing him by the throat he said, `Pay what you owe.' [29] So his fellow servant fell down and besought him, `Have patience with me, and I will pay you.' [30] He refused and went and put him in prison till he should pay his debt. [31] When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place. [32] Then his lord summoned him and said to him, `You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you besought me; [33] and should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?' [34] And in anger his lord delivered him to the jailers, till he should pay all his debt. [35] So also My Heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart."
*************
Commentary:
21-35. Peter's question and particularly Jesus' reply prescribe the spirit of understanding and mercy which should govern Christians' behavior.
In Hebrew the figure of seventy times seven means the same as "always" (cf. Genesis 4:24): "Therefore, our Lord did not limit forgiveness to a fixed number, but declared that it must be continuous and forever" (Chrysostom, "Hom. on St. Matthew", 6). Here also we can see the contrast between man's ungenerous, calculating approach to forgiveness, and God's infinite mercy. The parable also clearly shows that we are totally in God's debt. A talent was the equivalent of six thousand denarii, and a denarius a working man's daily wage. Ten thousand talents, an enormous sum, gives us an idea of the immense value attaching to the pardon we receive from God. Overall, the parable teaches that we must always forgive our brothers, and must do so wholeheartedly.
"Force yourself, if necessary, always to forgive those who offend you, from the very first moment. For the greatest injury or offense that you can suffer from them is nothing compared to what God has pardoned you" ([St] J. Escriva, "The Way", 452).
******************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Forgiveness of Injuries. The Parable of the Unforgiving Servant
[21] Then Peter came up and said to Him (Jesus), "Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? As many as seven times?" [22] Jesus said to him, "I do not say to you seven times, but seventy times seven.
[23] "Therefore the Kingdom of Heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his servants. [24] When he began the reckoning, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents; [25] and as he could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and payment to be made. [26] So the servant fell on his knees, imploring him, 'Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.' [27] And out of pity for him the lord of that servant released him and forgave him the debt. [28] But that same servant, as he went out, came upon one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and seizing him by the throat he said, `Pay what you owe.' [29] So his fellow servant fell down and besought him, `Have patience with me, and I will pay you.' [30] He refused and went and put him in prison till he should pay his debt. [31] When his fellow servants saw what had taken place, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place. [32] Then his lord summoned him and said to him, `You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you besought me; [33] and should not you have had mercy on your fellow servant, as I had mercy on you?' [34] And in anger his lord delivered him to the jailers, till he should pay all his debt. [35] So also My Heavenly Father will do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother from your heart."
*************
Commentary:
21-35. Peter's question and particularly Jesus' reply prescribe the spirit of understanding and mercy which should govern Christians' behavior.
In Hebrew the figure of seventy times seven means the same as "always" (cf. Genesis 4:24): "Therefore, our Lord did not limit forgiveness to a fixed number, but declared that it must be continuous and forever" (Chrysostom, "Hom. on St. Matthew", 6). Here also we can see the contrast between man's ungenerous, calculating approach to forgiveness, and God's infinite mercy. The parable also clearly shows that we are totally in God's debt. A talent was the equivalent of six thousand denarii, and a denarius a working man's daily wage. Ten thousand talents, an enormous sum, gives us an idea of the immense value attaching to the pardon we receive from God. Overall, the parable teaches that we must always forgive our brothers, and must do so wholeheartedly.
"Force yourself, if necessary, always to forgive those who offend you, from the very first moment. For the greatest injury or offense that you can suffer from them is nothing compared to what God has pardoned you" ([St] J. Escriva, "The Way", 452).
******************
Source: "The Navarre Bible: Text and Commentaries". Biblical text taken from the Revised Standard Version and New Vulgate. Commentaries made by members of the Faculty of Theology of the University of Navarre, Spain. Published by Four Courts Press, Kill Lane, Blackrock, Co. Dublin, Ireland.
Reprinted with permission from Four Courts Press and Scepter Publishers, the U.S. publisher.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)