From: Mark 9:2-13
The Transfiguration
[2] And after six days Jesus took with Him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain apart by themselves; and He was transfigured before them, [3] and His garments became glistening, intensely white, as no fuller on earth bleach them. [4] And there appeared to them Elijah with Moses; and they were talking to Jesus. [5] And Peter said to Jesus, "Master, it is well that we are here; let us make three booths, one for You and one for Moses and one for Elijah." [6] For he did not know what to say, for they were exceedingly afraid. [7] And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, "This is My beloved Son; listen to Him." [8] And suddenly looking around they no longer saw any one with them but Jesus only. [9] And as they were coming down the mountain, He charged them to tell no one what they had seen, until the Son of Man should have risen from the dead. [10] So they kept the matter to themselves, questioning what the rising from the dead meant. [11] And they asked Him, "Why do the scribes say that first Elijah must come?" [12] And He said to them, "Elijah does come first to restore all things; and how is it written of the Son of Man, that He should suffer many things and be treated with contempt? [13] But I tell you that Elijah has come, and they did to him whatever they pleased, as it is written of him."
_______________________
Commentary:
2-10. We contemplate in awe this manifestation of the glory of the Son of God to three of His disciples. Ever since the Incarnation, the divinity of our Lord has usually been hidden behind His humanity. But Christ wishes to show, to these favorite disciples, who will later be pillars of the Church, the splendor of His divine glory, in order to encourage them to follow the difficult way that lies ahead, fixing their gaze on the happy goal which is awaiting them at the end. This is why, as St. Thomas comments (cf. "Summa Theologia", III, q. 45, a. 1), it was appropriate for Him to give them an insight into His glory. The fact that the Transfiguration comes immediately after the first announcement of His passion, and His prophetic words about how His followers would also have to carry His cross, shows us that "through many tribulations we must enter the kingdom of God" (Acts 14:22).
What happened at the Transfiguration? To understand this miraculous event in Christ's life, we must remember that in order to redeem us by His passion and death our Lord freely renounced divine glory and became man, assuming flesh which was capable of suffering and which was not glorious, becoming like us in every way except sin (cf. Hebrew 4:15). In the Transfiguration, Jesus Christ willed that the glory which was His as God and which His soul had from the moment of the Incarnation, should miraculously become present in His body. "We should learn from Jesus' attitude in these trials. During His life on earth He did not even want the glory that belong to Him. Though He had the right to be treated as God, He took the form of a servant, a slave (cf. Philippians 2:6)" ([St] J. Escriva, "Christ Is Passing By", 62). Bearing in mind WHO became man (the divinity of the person and the glory of His soul), it was appropriate for His body to be glorious; given the PURPOSE of His Incarnation, it was not appropriate, usually, for His glory to be evident. Christ shows His glory in the Transfiguration in order to move us to desire the divine glory which will be given us so that, having this hope, we too can understand "that the sufferings of this present time are not worth comparing with the glory that is to be revealed to us" (Romans 8:18).
2. According to Deuteronomy (19:15), to bear witness to anything the evidence of two or three must concur. Perhaps this is why Jesus wanted three Apostles to be present. It should be pointed out that these three Apostles were specially loved by Him; they were with Him also at the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Mark 5:37) and will also be closest to Him during His agony at Gethsemane (Mark 14:33). Cf. note on Matthew 17:1-13.
7. This is how St. Thomas Aquinas explains the meaning of the Transfiguration: "Just as in Baptism, where the mystery of the first regeneration was proclaimed, the operation of the whole Trinity was made manifest, because the Son Incarnate was there, the Holy Spirit appeared under the form of a dove, and the Father made Himself known in the voice; so also in the Transfiguration, which is the sign of the second regeneration [the Resurrection], the whole Trinity appears--the Father in the voice, the Son in the man, the Holy Spirit in the bright cloud; for just as in Baptism He confers innocence, as signified by the simplicity of the dove, so in the Resurrection will He give His elect the clarity of glory and the refreshment from every form of evil, as signified by the bright cloud" ("Summa Theologiae", III, q. 45, 1.4 ad 2). For, really, the Transfiguration was in some way an anticipation not only of Christ's glorification but also of ours. As St. Paul says, "it is the same Spirit Himself bearing witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs, heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ, provided we suffer with Him in order that we may also be glorified with Him" (Romans 8:16-17).
10. That the dead would rise was already revealed in the Old Testament (cf. Daniel 12:2-3; 2 Maccabees 7:9; 12:43) and was believed by pious Jews (cf. John 11:23-25). However, they were unable to understand the profound truth of the death and Resurrection of the Lord: they expected a glorious and triumphant Messiah, despite the prophecy that He would suffer and die (cf. Isaiah 53). Hence the Apostles' oblique approach; they too do not dare to directly question our Lord about His Resurrection.
11-13. The scribes and Pharisees interpret the messianic prophecy in Malachi (3:1-2) as meaning that Elijah will appear in person, dramatically, to be followed by the all-triumphant Messiah, with no shadow of pain or humiliation. Jesus tells them that Elijah has indeed come, in the person of John the Baptist (Matthew 17:13) and has prepared the way of the Messiah, a way of pain and suffering.
Verse 12 is a question which Jesus puts to His disciples, but they should really have asked it themselves, had they realized that Christ's Resurrection presupposed the Messiah's suffering and death. Since they fail to ask it, Jesus does, to teach them that He like Elijah (that is, John the Baptist) must experience suffering before entering His glory.
_________________________
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.
Saturday, February 18, 2006
Friday, February 17, 2006
Bozek finds hope in meeting with Archbishop
Despite a church dispute that has resulted in excommunication, the Rev. Marek Bozek is confident that reconciliation is possible between him, St. Stanislaus parish and the archbishop of St. Louis.Gentlemen's agreement? Of course, this is from a man who could not keep his promise of obedience to his own bishop.
Bozek confirmed that he had a personal meeting with Archbishop Raymond Burke on Tuesday, although he said a "gentlemen's agreement" prevented him from discussing the meeting.
"Both the archbishop and I are willing to work for reconciliation," he said. The response from the archdiocese to those comments is not as optimistic.Canon 1734 states:
"Canon law, like any legal system, prescribes specific procedures that must be observed in the enacting of a legal process or action," the written response stated. "As far as the Archdiocese of St. Louis is aware, the Board of Directors of the civil corporation of St. Stanislaus Kostka Church and Fr. Marek Bozek have not completed the canonical procedures that would be necessary for the suspension of either the excommunication of Fr. Bozek and the Board of Directors or the suppression of St. Stanislaus Kostka Parish. Canon 1734 in the Code of Canon Law outlines the procedure that is to be followed."
Can. 1734 ß1 Before having recourse, the person must seek in writing from its author the revocation or amendment of the decree. Once this petition has been lodged, it is by that very fact understood that the suspension of the execution of the decree is also being sought.The article continues, in part:
ß2 The petition must be made within the peremptory time limit of ten canonical days from the time the decree was lawfully notified.
ß3 The norms in ßß1 and 2 do not apply:
1ƒ in having recourse to the Bishop against decrees given by authorities who are subject to him;
2ƒ in having recourse against the decree by which a hierarchical recourse is decided, unless the decision was given by the Bishop himself ;
3ƒ in having recourse in accordance with canon. 57 and 1735.
While all sides are focused on church law and regulations, the people of St. Stanislaus are busy being a Catholic church. . .The new priest has been busy with weddings, funerals and baptisms, and he recently started an adult education class, "The Splendor of Vatican II," and a movie club.This is a bit hard to comprehend. Having been suppressed, St Stanislaus Kostka Parish is no longer part of the Catholic Church - it is not Catholic. Neither Archbishop Burke's Decree of Supression (PDF) nor the Notification indicate in any way that it is Roman Catholic. While some may pretend to be Catholic, that pretension does not make it so.
The thought occurred to me this evening at Adoration, for some strange reason, that many claim to be Catholic and many wish to be known as Catholic, but how few there seem to be who actually want and desire to be Catholic - how few are there who truly strive to follow our Lord by submitting themselves to His Church, who freely conform their wills to His, despite the culture, even within parts of the Church, which exhorts them to pick and choose what to believe or who to obey. But more on that later...
"It's like baking a pie from scratch," [Bozek] said. "It has started looking and smelling good."Stated like most who choose disobedience...sort of protestant, really. While it might look like a Catholic church, we know that it is not. And pity those, who in flagrant disobedience and defiance (or ignorance) are receiving the Sacraments either illicitly or invalidly. How sad. As always, we need to continue to pray for their repentance and conversion.
Springfield News-Leader article
New cardinals? Rome buzzes with excitement as rumors fly
Unfortunately, I don't see Archbishop Burke's name in the list - it would be nice, though, to address him as "Your Emminence" rather than "Your Excellency". Of course, many have no doubt that sooner or later, this will happen.
Catholic News Service link...
Catholic News Service link...
Fr John Trigilio:Boycott Da Vinci Code film
A well known Catholic priest is calling for Catholics to boycott the upcoming feature film version of Dan Brown's popular novel The "Duh" Vinci Code.
Fiction, yes. Literature, no. Recommend, no. Denounce and repudiate, yes. Had such ludicrous conspiracy theories been written about Islam, Judaism or any other religion, there would be lawsuits and protests galore. Catholics let their enemies kick them in the groin too much. It's time to wake up, stand up and defend our religion and our Church. Dan Brown should find another hobby.Classic...
Anti-abortion bill passes (South Dakota) Senate committee
From Staff ReportsSource...
February 17, 2006, 10:59 am
A bill to ban nearly all abortion in South Dakota passed 5-1 in the Senate State Affairs Committee this morning.
The bill, which says a state task force found that life begins at conception, is an attempt to force the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that is the foundation for legal abortion in the United States.
Supporters of the proposed ban, which has passed the House, told the panel it’s time to look at that decision again.
“This is now 2006. Thirty-three years have gone by,’’ Republican Rep. Roger Hunt of Brandon said. “We know about DNA. We know about the fact that the child in a mother’s womb basically has a separate identity."
Hat Tip to Darla M. for the update
More Letters on St Stanislaus, Archbishop Burke
I was unaware of these letters until a periodic review of the St Stanislaus website was done as I was looking for any updated FOSIL/Call to Action/Catholic Action Network Conference event listings for the "convocation" being held at St. Stanislaus next Saturday on Feb 25...
Here we see in the first letter, an example of a pitiable man in the throes of a very confused state, speaking the same distortions which have become "sound bite" items and "cheers" of those who choose schism over fidelity and obedience. Thomas A. Szyszkiewicz, of course and as usual, responds clearly and factually, in a manner which rational people will understand.
Questions for Burke--------------------
By Daryl Schlesser | Arcadia, Wis.
One has to wonder why a person of Archbishop Raymond Burke’s caliber can turn against so great a God and his beloved mother, Mary?
As Christ and his apostles walked the countryside teaching and establishing churches, Archbishop Burke has left a trail of church closings, destruction and scattered faithful.
How many tears do you think Mary has shed watching her poor, hungry, sick and homeless as she sees millions of dollars spent on an ego shrine in La Crosse?
Instead of condemning the good people of St. Stanislaus Kostka parish of St. Louis, he had a golden opportunity to learn how they successfully ran the nuts and bolts of their parish, leaving his clergy more than enough time to minister to the faithful so that this great church could flourish even beyond our wildest dreams. Or are we destined to become a church driven by money, power, politics, sex and ego?
May the Triune God Bless and Save us all.
Daryl Schlesser
Arcadia, WI
Member of Saint Boniface Parish
Wumandee, Wisconsin.
Archbishop Burke made tough decision____________________
By Thomas A. Szyszkiewicz | Peterson, Minn.
Daryl Schlesser’s letter regarding Archbishop Raymond Burke made absolutely no sense. It’s very hard to argue with strictly emotional statements that have no basis in fact, but I will attempt my best.
Anyone who knows the man knows he has not turned against God and Mary. Anyone who knows him knows that the shrine to Our Lady of Guadalupe is no ego trip but something built for the glory of God and the renewal of God’s people. Anyone who knows him knows that he does not delight in closing churches but only closed them because of practical necessity. Anyone who knows him knows that his decision to deal with St. Stanislaus Parish was done only because he knows his duties as a bishop and that those duties are not always pleasant.
Mr. Schlesser believes the archbishop could have learned something from the parish. Apparently Mr. Schlesser needs to learn that the situation at St. Stanislaus had always been against the norms of the Catholic Church, even when the agreement allowing the lay board of trustees was first signed in 1891. Apparently Mr. Schlesser needs to learn that many previous archbishops of St. Louis tried to deal with the parish and none succeeded. Apparently Mr. Schlesser needs to learn that the St. Stanislaus board has never had an audit done that was made available to the archdiocese or the general public and so no one really knows how much money they have or how much their land and properties are worth.
Archbishop Burke at least had the courage and forthrightness to take the bull by the horns even though it would have been easier to let it slide, as so many did before him. Because he took decisive action does not mean he should be subjected to the slanders of those who do not know him or the situations he faces.
Here we see in the first letter, an example of a pitiable man in the throes of a very confused state, speaking the same distortions which have become "sound bite" items and "cheers" of those who choose schism over fidelity and obedience. Thomas A. Szyszkiewicz, of course and as usual, responds clearly and factually, in a manner which rational people will understand.
Seven Wonders Finalist No.13: St. Louis Cathedral Basilica
St. Louis Cathedral Basilica is the official name of the Catholic church on the northwestern corner of Lindell Boulevard and Newstead Avenue in the Central West End, but it is known to most as the New Cathedral.The Cathedral is surely one of the most beautiful churches in the world. It is a "Must See" for anyone visiting the St. Louis area.
Built in the early 1900s, it replaced the Old Cathedral on the St. Louis riverfront as the seat of the Archdiocese of St. Louis. In 1997, the church was elevated to basilica status.
Its design - including a conspicuous, green-tiled main dome - combines architecture of the Romanesque style on the exterior with a Byzantine style inside.
. . .the cathedral is best known for its mosaic work, which was begun in 1912 and completed in 1988. It is the largest collection of mosaics in the world, covering more than 83,000 square feet with more than 41.5 million pieces. The work reflects the efforts of 20 artists.
Full story here.
Senator Jim Talent’s switch called ‘big distraction’
by Jennifer Brinker, St Louis Review Staff Writer
_________________
As U.S. Sen. Jim Talent from Missouri announced his decision last week to withdraw his support for a federal bill to ban human cloning, pro-life leaders in Missouri and at the national level have shown disappointment over his decision.
At the same time, the Missouri Catholic Conference, the public policy arm of the state’s bishops, is calling on the Republican senator to oppose an initiative that would constitutionally protect embryonic stem-cell research and human cloning in Missouri.
The conference’s assistant director, Mike Hoey, said that Talent’s decision to distance himself from the federal legislation and his support of a newer alternative method of stem cell research are nothing more than "a big distraction" from the constitutional amendment issue that Missouri voters will likely face on the Nov. 7 ballot.
Last week, Talent withdrew as a co-sponsor of SB 658, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act, claiming it would have a negative effect on newer technologies used in certain forms of stem-cell research.
Deacon Larry Weber, director of the Missouri Catholic Conference, called on Talent to reconsider his position on the bill.
"Pro-life Missourians expect that Senator Talent will not succumb to false statements and promises of cloning advocates, and will hold fast to his position in support of the cloning ban," Weber said.
In a speech Feb. 10 to the U.S. Senate, Talent also expressed his support for a newer method of stem-cell research called altered nuclear transfer, or ANT.
The procedure is similar to somatic cell nuclear transfer, more commonly known as therapeutic cloning, which the Church teaches is immoral. Altered nuclear transfer on a broad level creates an embryo, but it is genetically modified to prevent growth beyond an early stage.
Furthermore, a specific kind of the research, called oocyte-assisted reprogramming, has the potential to create pluripotent stem cells without creating and destroying an embryo. That theory, however, is still being debated among Catholic ethicists.
"It’s complicated — a very speculative type of technology," Hoey said of ANT. "We don’t know all of the moral ramifications of it. (Talent is) trying to use that to get out of a tight political spot."
During his speech to the Senate, Talent expressed his disapproval of somatic cell nuclear transfer, which the Church has repeatedly taught involves human cloning. (The full text of Talent’s speech can be downloaded as a PDF at talent.senate.gov/stemcell.pdf.)
"The reason SCNT is controversial is that it is a form of cloning," Talent said in his speech. "In fact, it is the same technique that was used successfully to create Dolly the sheep."
Rich Chrismer, a spokesperson for Talent, said that the senator has not taken a position on the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, which would constitutionally protect somatic cell nuclear transfer and human cloning in Missouri.
"He doesn’t always take positions on state issues, and he doesn’t take positions on ballot initiatives before it’s determined if they will be on the ballot," said Chrismer.
Hoey said the Missouri Catholic Conference is asking Missouri citizens to urge Talent to oppose the ballot initiative.
"This election is bigger than Jim Talent," said Hoey. "This constitutional amendment is more important than Jim Talent."
He added a message to the senator: "If you want to come along with us and defeat this, you can — but if you don’t, we’re going to remember."
Hoey added that Talent, who is up for re-election in November against state auditor Claire McCaskill, needs to make the ballot initiative a major theme of his re-election campaign.
"He is a national (and state) leader on pro-life," said Hoey. "If he wants to exercise leadership, he’s got to make this a major theme of his re-election campaign."
Talent spokesperson Chrismer acknowledged that Talent has received some opposition from both sides of the debate on his position on the federal cloning bill and ANT. However, he added that Talent’s goal is to "strike a balance, so that we can get the stem cells that we need to relieve human suffering, without cloning or destroying an embryo."
"Senator Talent has always been opposed to human cloning and supports stem-cell research," said Chrismer. "He has made very clear that alternatives like ANT, or ANT-OAR alternatives like that, should be pursued as a way to break the stalemate that we currently face and allow us to effectively ban human cloning."
Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, said his immediate concern lies not with Talent’s support of ANT, but his decision to withdraw support of the cloning ban legislation.
"This kind of ban is what you would want to set the outer limit, so that the new technologies don’t slide over into what we all object to," said Doerflinger. "I think the ban is very carefully written."
Catholic ethicists, including Doerflinger and Father Edward Richard, MS, professor of moral theology at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary in Shrewsbury, have noted that ANT is an umbrella term, with several scientific approaches to creating pluripotent stem cells.
Father Richard said any sound Catholic would not support ANT on a general level because it still creates a human embryo that would be destroyed.
However, oocyte-assisted reprogramming has the potential to create embryonic-like stem cells without destroying human life.
"Oocyte-assisted reprogramming seems to many ethicists and scientists a very acceptable approach, because its goal is simply to make embryonic stem cells directly, without ever making an embryo," said Doerflinger.
But many Catholic ethicists and scientists are hesitant to support the method of stem-cell research, until more answers are found.
Last month, a number of scientists and ethicists, including several from Catholic backgrounds, issued a statement through the Ethics and Public Policy Center of Washington, D.C., in which they endorsed oocyte-assisted reprogramming, with the condition it would be "technically feasible." (The statement can be found at www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.2374/pub_detail.asp.) "All they’re saying is if this really never makes an embryo, this would be acceptable," said Doerflinger. The group is open to exploring the idea using animal cells.
However, Father Richard warned that oocyte-assisted reprogramming uses the same process as somatic cell nuclear transfer.
"The problem with that is it has the full complement of human genes, and the nucleus is being placed in the egg, just like you do in cloning," said Father Richard.
"And the problem is I don’t think (scientists) can prove with moral certainty that that one cell that would be produced is never a human zygote."
Doerflinger also said he was concerned with Talent’s proposal to create a competition that would create incentives for scientists to create embryonic stem cells without cloning human embryos.
"I’m not sure that’s appropriate, for one thing," said Doerflinger. "I think a race is how we got the Korean cloning scandal. And then you have this incentive to say, ‘I passed the finish line,’ even if you didn’t."
The Missouri Catholic Conference is asking Missourians to contact Talent to urge his opposition to the proposed ballot issue in Missouri that seeks to protect human cloning and embryonic stem cell research.
Talent can be reached by phone at (202) 224-6154, fax at (202) 228-1518, or on the Internet at talent.senate.gov/Contact/default.cfm.
_________________
As U.S. Sen. Jim Talent from Missouri announced his decision last week to withdraw his support for a federal bill to ban human cloning, pro-life leaders in Missouri and at the national level have shown disappointment over his decision.
At the same time, the Missouri Catholic Conference, the public policy arm of the state’s bishops, is calling on the Republican senator to oppose an initiative that would constitutionally protect embryonic stem-cell research and human cloning in Missouri.
The conference’s assistant director, Mike Hoey, said that Talent’s decision to distance himself from the federal legislation and his support of a newer alternative method of stem cell research are nothing more than "a big distraction" from the constitutional amendment issue that Missouri voters will likely face on the Nov. 7 ballot.
Last week, Talent withdrew as a co-sponsor of SB 658, the Human Cloning Prohibition Act, claiming it would have a negative effect on newer technologies used in certain forms of stem-cell research.
Deacon Larry Weber, director of the Missouri Catholic Conference, called on Talent to reconsider his position on the bill.
"Pro-life Missourians expect that Senator Talent will not succumb to false statements and promises of cloning advocates, and will hold fast to his position in support of the cloning ban," Weber said.
In a speech Feb. 10 to the U.S. Senate, Talent also expressed his support for a newer method of stem-cell research called altered nuclear transfer, or ANT.
The procedure is similar to somatic cell nuclear transfer, more commonly known as therapeutic cloning, which the Church teaches is immoral. Altered nuclear transfer on a broad level creates an embryo, but it is genetically modified to prevent growth beyond an early stage.
Furthermore, a specific kind of the research, called oocyte-assisted reprogramming, has the potential to create pluripotent stem cells without creating and destroying an embryo. That theory, however, is still being debated among Catholic ethicists.
"It’s complicated — a very speculative type of technology," Hoey said of ANT. "We don’t know all of the moral ramifications of it. (Talent is) trying to use that to get out of a tight political spot."
During his speech to the Senate, Talent expressed his disapproval of somatic cell nuclear transfer, which the Church has repeatedly taught involves human cloning. (The full text of Talent’s speech can be downloaded as a PDF at talent.senate.gov/stemcell.pdf.)
"The reason SCNT is controversial is that it is a form of cloning," Talent said in his speech. "In fact, it is the same technique that was used successfully to create Dolly the sheep."
Rich Chrismer, a spokesperson for Talent, said that the senator has not taken a position on the Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative, which would constitutionally protect somatic cell nuclear transfer and human cloning in Missouri.
"He doesn’t always take positions on state issues, and he doesn’t take positions on ballot initiatives before it’s determined if they will be on the ballot," said Chrismer.
Hoey said the Missouri Catholic Conference is asking Missouri citizens to urge Talent to oppose the ballot initiative.
"This election is bigger than Jim Talent," said Hoey. "This constitutional amendment is more important than Jim Talent."
He added a message to the senator: "If you want to come along with us and defeat this, you can — but if you don’t, we’re going to remember."
Hoey added that Talent, who is up for re-election in November against state auditor Claire McCaskill, needs to make the ballot initiative a major theme of his re-election campaign.
"He is a national (and state) leader on pro-life," said Hoey. "If he wants to exercise leadership, he’s got to make this a major theme of his re-election campaign."
Talent spokesperson Chrismer acknowledged that Talent has received some opposition from both sides of the debate on his position on the federal cloning bill and ANT. However, he added that Talent’s goal is to "strike a balance, so that we can get the stem cells that we need to relieve human suffering, without cloning or destroying an embryo."
"Senator Talent has always been opposed to human cloning and supports stem-cell research," said Chrismer. "He has made very clear that alternatives like ANT, or ANT-OAR alternatives like that, should be pursued as a way to break the stalemate that we currently face and allow us to effectively ban human cloning."
Richard Doerflinger, deputy director of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Secretariat for Pro-Life Activities, said his immediate concern lies not with Talent’s support of ANT, but his decision to withdraw support of the cloning ban legislation.
"This kind of ban is what you would want to set the outer limit, so that the new technologies don’t slide over into what we all object to," said Doerflinger. "I think the ban is very carefully written."
Catholic ethicists, including Doerflinger and Father Edward Richard, MS, professor of moral theology at Kenrick-Glennon Seminary in Shrewsbury, have noted that ANT is an umbrella term, with several scientific approaches to creating pluripotent stem cells.
Father Richard said any sound Catholic would not support ANT on a general level because it still creates a human embryo that would be destroyed.
However, oocyte-assisted reprogramming has the potential to create embryonic-like stem cells without destroying human life.
"Oocyte-assisted reprogramming seems to many ethicists and scientists a very acceptable approach, because its goal is simply to make embryonic stem cells directly, without ever making an embryo," said Doerflinger.
But many Catholic ethicists and scientists are hesitant to support the method of stem-cell research, until more answers are found.
Last month, a number of scientists and ethicists, including several from Catholic backgrounds, issued a statement through the Ethics and Public Policy Center of Washington, D.C., in which they endorsed oocyte-assisted reprogramming, with the condition it would be "technically feasible." (The statement can be found at www.eppc.org/publications/pubID.2374/pub_detail.asp.) "All they’re saying is if this really never makes an embryo, this would be acceptable," said Doerflinger. The group is open to exploring the idea using animal cells.
However, Father Richard warned that oocyte-assisted reprogramming uses the same process as somatic cell nuclear transfer.
"The problem with that is it has the full complement of human genes, and the nucleus is being placed in the egg, just like you do in cloning," said Father Richard.
"And the problem is I don’t think (scientists) can prove with moral certainty that that one cell that would be produced is never a human zygote."
Doerflinger also said he was concerned with Talent’s proposal to create a competition that would create incentives for scientists to create embryonic stem cells without cloning human embryos.
"I’m not sure that’s appropriate, for one thing," said Doerflinger. "I think a race is how we got the Korean cloning scandal. And then you have this incentive to say, ‘I passed the finish line,’ even if you didn’t."
The Missouri Catholic Conference is asking Missourians to contact Talent to urge his opposition to the proposed ballot issue in Missouri that seeks to protect human cloning and embryonic stem cell research.
Talent can be reached by phone at (202) 224-6154, fax at (202) 228-1518, or on the Internet at talent.senate.gov/Contact/default.cfm.
Mother Mary Francis
Archbishop Burke reflects on the life and recent death of this Poor Clare nun whose life was so devoted to our Lord. "Her love of Christ had its source and finest expression in her communion with Christ in the Most Blessed Sacrament."
Archbishop Burke's column is here.
Archbishop Burke's column is here.
Heagle and Ferder - Breach of Faith
This was "buried" in a previous post but deserves it own posting:
On behalf of the Seattle Archdiocese, a nun and a priest teamed up to evaluate or counsel priests accused of sex abuse. They also counseled victims, one of whom is suing over the conflict of interest.
On behalf of the Seattle Archdiocese, a nun and a priest teamed up to evaluate or counsel priests accused of sex abuse. They also counseled victims, one of whom is suing over the conflict of interest.
Gospel for Friday, 6th Week in Ordinary Time
From: Mark 8:34-9:1
Christian Renunciation (Continuation)
[34] And He (Jesus) called to Him the multitude with His disciples, and said to them, "If any man would come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. [35] For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for My sake and the Gospel's will save it. [36] For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? [37] For what can a man give in return for his life? [38] For whoever is ashamed of Me and of My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed, when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels".
[1] And He said to them, "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Kingdom of God come with power."
___________________________
Commentary:
35. "Life": in the original text and the New Vulgate the word literally means "soul." But here, as in many other cases, "soul" and "life" are equivalent. The word "life" is used, clearly, in a double sense: earthly life and eternal life, the life of man here on earth and man's eternal happiness in Heaven. Death can put an end to earthly life, but it cannot destroy eternal life (cf. Matthew 10:28), the life which can only be given by Him who brings the dead back to life.
Understood in this way, we can grasp the paradoxical meaning of our Lord's phrase: whoever wishes to save his (earthly) life will lose his (eternal) life. But whoever loses his (earthly) life for Me and the Gospel, will save his (eternal) life. What, then, does saving one's (earthly) life mean? It means living this life as if there were non other--letting oneself be controlled by the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life (cf. 1 John 2:16). And losing one's (earthly) life means mortifying, by continuous ascetical effort, this triple concupiscence--that is, taking up one's cross (verse 34)--and consequently seeking and savoring the things that are God's and not the things of the earth (cf. Colossians 3:1-2).
36-37. Jesus promises eternal life to those who are willing to lose earthly life for His sake. He has given us example: He is the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for His sheep (John 10:15); and He fulfilled in His own case what He said to the Apostles on the night before He died: "Greater love has no man than this that a man lay down his life for his friends" (John 15:13).
38. Each person's eternal destiny will be decided by Christ. He is the Judge who will come to judge the living and the dead (Matthew 16:27). The sentence will depend on how faithful each has been in keeping the Lord's commandments--to love God and to love one's neighbor, for God's sake. On that day Christ will not recognize as His disciple anyone who is ashamed to imitate Jesus' humility and example and follow the precepts of the Gospel for fear of displeasing the world or worldly people: he has failed to confess by his life the faith which he claims to hold. A Christian, then, should never be ashamed of the Gospel (Romans 1:16); he should never let himself be drawn away by the worldliness around him; rather he should exercise a decisive influence on his environment, counting on the help of God's grace. The first Christians changed the ancient pagan world. God's arm has not grown shorter since their time (cf. Isaiah 59:1). Cf. Matthew 10:32-33 and note on same.
1. The coming o the Kingdom of God with power does not seem to refer to the second, glorious coming of Jesus at the end of time (the Parousia); it may, rather, indicate the amazing spread of the Church in the lifetime of the Apostles. Many of those present here will witness this. The growth and spread of the Church in the world can be explained only by the divine power God gives to the mystical body of Christ. The Transfiguration of our Lord, which is recounted in the next passage, is a sign, given to the Apostles, of Jesus' divinity and of the divine powers which He will give His Church.
______________________
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.
Christian Renunciation (Continuation)
[34] And He (Jesus) called to Him the multitude with His disciples, and said to them, "If any man would come after Me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow Me. [35] For whoever would save his life will lose it; and whoever loses his life for My sake and the Gospel's will save it. [36] For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? [37] For what can a man give in return for his life? [38] For whoever is ashamed of Me and of My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed, when He comes in the glory of His Father with the holy angels".
[1] And He said to them, "Truly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death before they see the Kingdom of God come with power."
___________________________
Commentary:
35. "Life": in the original text and the New Vulgate the word literally means "soul." But here, as in many other cases, "soul" and "life" are equivalent. The word "life" is used, clearly, in a double sense: earthly life and eternal life, the life of man here on earth and man's eternal happiness in Heaven. Death can put an end to earthly life, but it cannot destroy eternal life (cf. Matthew 10:28), the life which can only be given by Him who brings the dead back to life.
Understood in this way, we can grasp the paradoxical meaning of our Lord's phrase: whoever wishes to save his (earthly) life will lose his (eternal) life. But whoever loses his (earthly) life for Me and the Gospel, will save his (eternal) life. What, then, does saving one's (earthly) life mean? It means living this life as if there were non other--letting oneself be controlled by the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the pride of life (cf. 1 John 2:16). And losing one's (earthly) life means mortifying, by continuous ascetical effort, this triple concupiscence--that is, taking up one's cross (verse 34)--and consequently seeking and savoring the things that are God's and not the things of the earth (cf. Colossians 3:1-2).
36-37. Jesus promises eternal life to those who are willing to lose earthly life for His sake. He has given us example: He is the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for His sheep (John 10:15); and He fulfilled in His own case what He said to the Apostles on the night before He died: "Greater love has no man than this that a man lay down his life for his friends" (John 15:13).
38. Each person's eternal destiny will be decided by Christ. He is the Judge who will come to judge the living and the dead (Matthew 16:27). The sentence will depend on how faithful each has been in keeping the Lord's commandments--to love God and to love one's neighbor, for God's sake. On that day Christ will not recognize as His disciple anyone who is ashamed to imitate Jesus' humility and example and follow the precepts of the Gospel for fear of displeasing the world or worldly people: he has failed to confess by his life the faith which he claims to hold. A Christian, then, should never be ashamed of the Gospel (Romans 1:16); he should never let himself be drawn away by the worldliness around him; rather he should exercise a decisive influence on his environment, counting on the help of God's grace. The first Christians changed the ancient pagan world. God's arm has not grown shorter since their time (cf. Isaiah 59:1). Cf. Matthew 10:32-33 and note on same.
1. The coming o the Kingdom of God with power does not seem to refer to the second, glorious coming of Jesus at the end of time (the Parousia); it may, rather, indicate the amazing spread of the Church in the lifetime of the Apostles. Many of those present here will witness this. The growth and spread of the Church in the world can be explained only by the divine power God gives to the mystical body of Christ. The Transfiguration of our Lord, which is recounted in the next passage, is a sign, given to the Apostles, of Jesus' divinity and of the divine powers which He will give His Church.
______________________
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.
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Where have these people been?
Vatican urged to reopen debate on birth control
Nor are the considerations of heretics and apostates worthy of further review or debate. The debate is closed! It is a theological impossibility for the Church's teaching forbidding artificial contraception to change.
Lest we forget, the grave sinfulness of contraception is taught infallibly by the Church's ordinary universal teaching authority. Those who defend contraception forfeit any claim to being professed Catholics. Consequently, those who persist in their defense of contraception, deprive themselves of the divine graces which are reserved to bona fide members of the Roman Catholic Church. (Source)
Any bishop or any priest who teaches contrary to what the Church professes cares not a whit for the salvation of the souls entrusted to him. He is a wolf in sheep's clothing, an agent of the devil himself. We should pray for his conversion and repentance.
There are some who willingly choose to follow Christ and conform their wills to His will. And there are many who choose to reject Him and His Church. Spare us, O Lord!
Link to article.
PARIS (Reuters) - Encouraged by Pope Benedict's encyclical on love, a Roman Catholic bishop and a group of Christian intellectuals in France are urging the Vatican to reopen the debate on its ban on artificial birth control.If this bishop is being quoted correctly and in context, then this is just another sign of the problems we face. This is more than dissent - this is heresy, pure and simple. Of course, ignoring the constant teaching of the Church, he continues:
Bishop Francis Deniau told the Catholic magazine Le Pelerin this week that Benedict's first encyclical "Deus Caritas Est" (God is Love), which was widely praised for the positive way it spoke about sexual love, was a hopeful sign for possible change.
Deniau, bishop of Nevers in eastern France, noted that a papal commission had advised in 1966 to allow it, but Pope Paul ignored their recommendation after consulting several cardinals, including the future Pope John Paul.The Holy Father, Pope Paul VI, prophetically stated what would happen to all of society if contraception was allowed and embraced. Perhaps the good bishop should re-read Humanae Vitae with an open mind.
"The analyses made by the first commission in 1966, which did not condemn contraception, are worth being reviewed and debated," Deniau said. He said many Catholics found they could not follow the "rhythm method" of family planning.
"It's important that these things are not seen in a rigid fashion," he said.
Nor are the considerations of heretics and apostates worthy of further review or debate. The debate is closed! It is a theological impossibility for the Church's teaching forbidding artificial contraception to change.
Lest we forget, the grave sinfulness of contraception is taught infallibly by the Church's ordinary universal teaching authority. Those who defend contraception forfeit any claim to being professed Catholics. Consequently, those who persist in their defense of contraception, deprive themselves of the divine graces which are reserved to bona fide members of the Roman Catholic Church. (Source)
Any bishop or any priest who teaches contrary to what the Church professes cares not a whit for the salvation of the souls entrusted to him. He is a wolf in sheep's clothing, an agent of the devil himself. We should pray for his conversion and repentance.
There are some who willingly choose to follow Christ and conform their wills to His will. And there are many who choose to reject Him and His Church. Spare us, O Lord!
Link to article.
Gospel for Thursday, 6th Week in Ordinary Time
From: Mark 8:27-33
Peter's Profession of Faith
[27] And Jesus went on with His disciples, to the villages of Caesarea Philippi; and on the way He asked His disciples, "Who do men say that I am?" [28] And they told Him, "John the Baptist; and others say, Elijah; and others one of the prophets." [29] And He asked them, "But who do you say I am?" Peter answered Him, "You are the Christ." [30] And He charged them to tell no one about Him.
Jesus Foretells His Passion and Resurrection. Christian Renunciation
[31] And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. [32] And He said this plainly. And Peter took Him, and began to rebuke Him. [33] But turning and seeing His disciples, He rebuked Peter, and said, "Get behind Me, Satan! For you are not on the side of God, but of men."
______________________
Commentary:
29. Peter's profession of faith is reported here in a shorter form than in Matthew 16:18-19. Peter seems to go no further than say that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah. Eusebius of Caesarea, in the fourth century, explains the Evangelist's reserve by the fact that he was the interpreter of St. Peter, who omitted from his preaching anything which might appear to be self-praise. The Holy Spirit, when inspiring St. Mark, wanted the Gospel to reflect the preaching of the prince of the Apostles, leaving it to other evangelists to fill out certain important details to do with the episode of the confession of Peter.
The sketchiness of the narrative still show Peter's role quite clearly: he is the first to come forward affirming the messiahship of Jesus. Our Lord's question, "But who do you say that I am?", shows what Jesus is asking the Apostles for--not an opinion, more or less favorable, but firm faith. It is St. Peter who expresses this faith (cf. note on Matthew 16:13-20).
31-33. This is the first occasion when Jesus tells His disciples about the sufferings and death He must undergo. He does it twice more, later on (cf. Mark 9:31 and 10:32). The Apostles are surprised, because they cannot and do not want to understand why the Master should have to suffer and die, much less that He should be so treated "by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes." But Peter, with his usual spontaneity, immediately begins to protest. And Jesus replies to him using the same words as He addressed the devil when he tempted Him (cf. Matthew 4:10); He wants to affirm, once again, that His mission is spiritual, not earthly, and that therefore it cannot be understood by using mere human criteria: it is governed by God's designs, which were that Jesus should redeem us through His passion and death. So too, for a Christian, suffering, united with Christ, is also a means of salvation.
________________________
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.
Peter's Profession of Faith
[27] And Jesus went on with His disciples, to the villages of Caesarea Philippi; and on the way He asked His disciples, "Who do men say that I am?" [28] And they told Him, "John the Baptist; and others say, Elijah; and others one of the prophets." [29] And He asked them, "But who do you say I am?" Peter answered Him, "You are the Christ." [30] And He charged them to tell no one about Him.
Jesus Foretells His Passion and Resurrection. Christian Renunciation
[31] And He began to teach them that the Son of Man must suffer many things, and be rejected by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes, and be killed, and after three days rise again. [32] And He said this plainly. And Peter took Him, and began to rebuke Him. [33] But turning and seeing His disciples, He rebuked Peter, and said, "Get behind Me, Satan! For you are not on the side of God, but of men."
______________________
Commentary:
29. Peter's profession of faith is reported here in a shorter form than in Matthew 16:18-19. Peter seems to go no further than say that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah. Eusebius of Caesarea, in the fourth century, explains the Evangelist's reserve by the fact that he was the interpreter of St. Peter, who omitted from his preaching anything which might appear to be self-praise. The Holy Spirit, when inspiring St. Mark, wanted the Gospel to reflect the preaching of the prince of the Apostles, leaving it to other evangelists to fill out certain important details to do with the episode of the confession of Peter.
The sketchiness of the narrative still show Peter's role quite clearly: he is the first to come forward affirming the messiahship of Jesus. Our Lord's question, "But who do you say that I am?", shows what Jesus is asking the Apostles for--not an opinion, more or less favorable, but firm faith. It is St. Peter who expresses this faith (cf. note on Matthew 16:13-20).
31-33. This is the first occasion when Jesus tells His disciples about the sufferings and death He must undergo. He does it twice more, later on (cf. Mark 9:31 and 10:32). The Apostles are surprised, because they cannot and do not want to understand why the Master should have to suffer and die, much less that He should be so treated "by the elders and the chief priests and the scribes." But Peter, with his usual spontaneity, immediately begins to protest. And Jesus replies to him using the same words as He addressed the devil when he tempted Him (cf. Matthew 4:10); He wants to affirm, once again, that His mission is spiritual, not earthly, and that therefore it cannot be understood by using mere human criteria: it is governed by God's designs, which were that Jesus should redeem us through His passion and death. So too, for a Christian, suffering, united with Christ, is also a means of salvation.
________________________
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, February 15, 2006
Sister Helen Prejean testifies that Ryan is 'a man of honesty'
. . .U.S. District Judge Rebecca R. Pallmeyer barred the 66-year-old Dominican nun from New Orleans from mentioning the issue that brought her together with Ryan - the crusade to repeal the death penalty in America.More.
Pallmeyer ruled that the death penalty issue was irrelevant to charges that Ryan steered big-money state contracts and leases to friends and got free vacations and gifts in return.
Prejean testified that she had repeatedly met with Ryan to discuss "public policy" and "social policy" issues.
Archbishop Burke meets with St. Stanislaus' priest
By Tim Townsend
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Perhaps, Archbishop Burke was informing him of the next step in the process - that about which Dr Ed Peters commented on Dec 20 2005:
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke met Tuesday with a priest he declared excommunicated in December. The Rev. Marek Bozek, who was hired as pastor of St. Stanislaus Kostka parish late last year, confirmed Tuesday afternoon that he had met with the archbishop but would not comment on their conversation.Perhaps our friends from St. Stanislaus would care to comment?
Bozek, a Polish national who has worked as a Catholic priest in southwestern Missouri for three years, left his home diocese of Springfield Cape-Girardeau without the permission of his own bishop, John J. Leibrecht, to lead St. Stanislaus.
Leibrecht suspended Bozek on Dec. 2, and the priest was immediately hired by St. Stanislaus's lay board of directors. The parish had been without an ordained leader since August 2004, when Burke removed its priests.
By hiring Bozek, the six members of the board also brought excommunication on themselves by committing a schismatic act, according to Burke. The archbishop has since "suppressed" St. Stanislaus, meaning the parish north of downtown is no longer part of the Archdiocese of St. Louis.
Phone calls to the archdiocese seeking comment were not returned Tuesday afternoon.
Perhaps, Archbishop Burke was informing him of the next step in the process - that about which Dr Ed Peters commented on Dec 20 2005:
Fr. Bozek needs to know something here: contumacy for an excommunication imposed for an act of schism is itself punishable, this time, by penal dismissal from the clerical state (1983 CIC 1364 § 2). Moreover, once imposed, penal dismissal from the clergy--not being a censure (1983 CIC 1336 § 1, 5°)--is not reversible by what amounts to offering a sincere apology. Indeed, reinstatement of a "defrocked" priest is reserved to Rome (1983 CIC 293) and is so rare as to be non-existent.
Not too surprising...
..."Evidence Doesn't Matter" in American Psychological Association Abortion Advocacy
Springfield, IL (Feb. 15, 2005) -- According to a spokesperson for the American Psychological Association, the APA's pro-choice position, first adopted in 1969, is based on a civil rights view, not on scientific proof of any mental health benefits arising from abortion.More at LifeSiteNews
More on Ferder and Heagle
Ferder and Heagle's web site is called "Tender Fires", The Spiritual Promise of SexualityThese two are scheduled to be here in St Louis on February 24-26 at the Mercy Center, for a Workshop for Voice of the Faithful, St Louis, on: Sexuality & Spirituality.
Archbishop Burke has been notified of this pair's coming to the Archdiocese at the request of another dissenting organization (VOTFSL) in our midst. Let us pray that those who would choose to pervert the teachings of the Church and of the natural moral law are admonished to cease or, at least, to take their poison elsewhere.
From Our Lady's Warriors, we read about TARA (Therapy and Renewal Associates):
The following link contains a list of books recommended by the Dominican Sisters of Springfield, IL.
From a "DANGEROUS to the FAITH" website:
There is so much more, but I will have to post a followup. I must gratefully thank D. Meyers for for her tremendous help and courage in putting so much time and effort into exposing this poison in the Diocese of LaCrosse and elsewhere.
Archbishop Burke has been notified of this pair's coming to the Archdiocese at the request of another dissenting organization (VOTFSL) in our midst. Let us pray that those who would choose to pervert the teachings of the Church and of the natural moral law are admonished to cease or, at least, to take their poison elsewhere.
From Our Lady's Warriors, we read about TARA (Therapy and Renewal Associates):
Described as an outpatient psychotherapy resource for clergy, members of religious communities, lay ministers, other professional adults, couples and families, and co-directed by dissenters Sr. Fran Ferder and Fr. John Heagle, they counsel that sodomy and a homosexual lifestyle is perfectly acceptable.Emphasis below is mine:
Dr. Ludwig, director of university ministry and professor of Catholic studies at De Paul University in Chicago, author of Reconstructing Catholicism for a New Generation, is an expert at "deconstructing Catholicism" — as his signature in support on the Voice of the Faithful petition indicates.. . .Ludwig's appearance in Des Moines, along with the recent appearances of high-profile dissidents in other dioceses — such as Australian ex-priest Michael Morwood in Los Angeles, New Age proselytizer St. Jose Hobday in Altoona-Johnstown, Pa., Sr. Fran Ferder and Fr. John Heagle in Boise, Idaho — not only demonstrates the commitment of a significant number of bishops to the ongoing destruction of the Church in America, but most importantly signals the determination of the hijackers of Vatican II to take advantage of the sex abuse scandals to maintain control and continue Amchurch's triumphal march...(Link: Catholic Culture)===============
... The mobilizing metaphor of this council document (Lumen Gentium, specifically its description of the Church as The People of God) remains the image of the church as a community of faith in history. The result has been a revolution in Catholic consciousness that is stronger than our words and deeper than our symbols. It is a shift from understanding the church primarily as the hierarchical institution to experiencing it as a community of disciples. It is a way of recognizing the primordial dignity of baptism as the basis for all mission and ministry. (7. Partnership: Men & Women in Ministry, by Fran Ferder and John Heagle, Ave Maria Press, 1989, pp. 116-117.)===============
(Link: The Wanderer)
The author sees a close connection between the human being, adam, and ‘earth’ which is adamah in Hebrew. Human beings are a mixture of matter and spirit, of rootedness in the earth while having their origin in God’s creative breath. Since the earthy being had as yet no gender, in English it should be referred to as ‘it’. We translate it as ‘earth-creature’.1===============In Hebrew, ‘he’ and ‘it’ are the same word; about `earth creature', see F.FERDER and J.HEAGLE, Partnership, Notre Dame 1989, pp. 31-46.(Link: WomenPriests.org)
The following link contains a list of books recommended by the Dominican Sisters of Springfield, IL.
Ferder, Fran and Heagle, John. Partnership: Women and Men in Ministry. Notre Dame, Ind.: Ave Maria Press, 1989.===============
(Link: Dominican Sisters, Springfield IL)
From a "DANGEROUS to the FAITH" website:
WHY HAVE YOU (Fran Ferder) AND JOHN HEAGLE, two celibate people, chosen to work in the area of sexuality? . . .===============
You talk about diversity and inclusivity as an essential teaching of Jesus—that we need to let everyone come to the table.
That is definitely a central message that we want to communicate. Often it's around issues that deal with sexuality that people don't feel included in our church. I don't see a lot of people who are pro-capital punishment feeling like they're not part of our church or that they can't participate in the sacraments. But someone divorced and remarried without an annulment is explicitly excluded, unless they are refraining from sex with their spouse.
This is where genital behavior—what you do or don't do with your genitals—becomes the defining issue in Catholic morality. And we need to move away from that.
(Link: The Claretians)
Those Who Feel Called to Priesthood===============
An Experience of Priesthood
by Fran Ferder, F.S.P.A., Ph.D.
New Woman, New Church, New Priestly Ministry
Proceedings of the Second Conference on the Ordination of Roman Catholic Women
November 1978, Baltimore, U.S.A. pp 101-109.
Fran Ferder, FSPA, authored Called to Break Bread?, a psychological investigation of 100 women who feel called to priesthood in the Catholic Church. She holds a Ph.D. in clinical psychology from Loyola University, Chicago, and is a member of the Franciscan Sisters of Perpetual Adoration, LaCrosse, Wisconsin. She currently serves on the staff of the Quixote Center, Mt. Rainier, Maryland.
(Link: WomenPriests.org)
Ferder and Heagle have co-authored several books, including: Partnership: Women and Men in Ministry and Your Sexual Self: Pathway to Authenticity. Their most recent book Tender Fires: The Spiritual Promise of Sexuality (Crossroad Publishing) was released this fall.===============
I reached Ferder and Heagle by telephone in Seattle to talk about their new book.
by Gerry McCarthy, Editor of The Social Edge
(Link: The Social Edge)
There is so much more, but I will have to post a followup. I must gratefully thank D. Meyers for for her tremendous help and courage in putting so much time and effort into exposing this poison in the Diocese of LaCrosse and elsewhere.
Who said, "Ya can't fix stupid"?
During the 2004 campaign, John Kerry was subjected to bitter invective from religious leaders and pundits for his stance on abortion. Raymond Burke, the Roman Catholic archbishop of St. Louis, went so far as to forbid Kerry Communion in his diocese, and Fox News commentator Sean Hannity opined that if Kerry couldn't support a major tenet of his religion "... he can go to another church."As if there is no hypocrisy in Franken's words? This is from a review of Al Franken's book, "The Truth with jokes".
All of this might be considered fair play except -- as Franken notes, no pro-choice Republican Catholics, including such notables as Rudolph Giuliani, Arnold Schwarzenegger and even a member of George Bush's own cabinet, were ever subjected to these sanctions or criticisms.
Franken quips that Hannity, a Catholic and a staunch proponent of the death penalty, may have since left the church in search of a religion that is "more bloodthirsty." While Hannity might be allowed some partisan license, it's difficult to see any appropriateness in Bishop Burke's hypocrisy.
Apparently had he done any research at all or read any of the pastoral letters by Archbishop Burke, he might not come off as a clueless "comedian"...
Fr Heagle and Sr Ferder - Soon To Be Here
Breach of Faith
On behalf of the Seattle Archdiocese, a nun and a priest teamed up to evaluate or counsel priests accused of sex abuse. They also counseled victims, one of whom is suing over this conflict of interest.. . .This article will be followed up with a number a links which demonstrate very profound problems with this "team".
Their co-written book, Tender Fires: The Spiritual Promise of Sexuality, makes the case for a new, healthier vision of Christian sexuality based on joy rather than sin. They have also issued support for homosexuality, a position that has earned them the title of "dissidents" among orthodox Catholics and put them at odds with Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, whom Ferder once called "woefully ignorant of recent findings on human sexual development."
Honduran Cardinal Speaks on Global Poverty, and more...
As well as other things...
Link.
In an interview, Rodriguez Maradiaga said an issue recently in the news in the U.S. - bishops in favor of denying Holy Communion to Catholic politicians who support abortion rights - is not relevant in Honduras "because those people never come to church."The greater public scandal would be to allow a so-called "Catholic" who supports and facilitates the murder of innocent children to receive Holy Communion...I'm afraid the good cardinal is a bit confused on this point.
But, he said, "personally, I could never deny Holy Communion to a person. It would be a public scandal. Those who know they shouldn't be accepting the Eucharist have their own consciences. In my capacity as a pastor, I would never decide that for someone else."
Link.
Disordered?
Homosexual activists are never "satisfied". The objectively disordered inclination they have, directly affects, for many, their ability for rational thought. Being "possessed", as it were, to a certain unnatural depravity, they continue to ask for, and in some cases, demand that they be permitted to "have their way" with teenagers as this recent article explains:
Prayer, sacrifice, acts of penance and mortification are needed to atone for the enormous sins against life and against God that we are witnessing today. May God grant us the grace to see what is happening to us and to repair the damage we are inflicting upon ourselves by rejectng His moral order and principles.
Lifesite Article here.
Gay Activists Ask Canada to Lower Age of Consent for Anal Sex, National Post AgreesThe promotion, advocacy and approval of homosexual vices (or any sort of sins against Chastity) fosters a complete rejection of God and the rejection of any sense of objective morality. It leads to moral decay and rot within any society. It becomes the means by which society inflicts upon itself - suicide - a sexual suicide. More and more we think our "liberation" has set us free, yet, as history demonstrates, we are becoming more and more enslaved by the addiction of sexual perversity and deviance. And the ultimate consequence of this will be death.
TORONTO, February 14, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Homosexual activists have long sought to distance themselves from pedophiles, however Canada's most prominent homosexual activist group has now demanded the lowering the age of consent for anal sex to 16 from 18. Surprisingly, Canada's National Post, regarded by some as a 'conservative' paper has come out in favour of the proposal...
Prayer, sacrifice, acts of penance and mortification are needed to atone for the enormous sins against life and against God that we are witnessing today. May God grant us the grace to see what is happening to us and to repair the damage we are inflicting upon ourselves by rejectng His moral order and principles.
Lifesite Article here.
Gospel for Wednesday, 6th Week in Ordinary Time
From: Mark 8:22-26
The Curing of a Blind Man at Bethsaida
[22] And they came to Bethsaida. And some people brought to Him (Jesus) a blind man, and begged Him to touch him. [23] And He took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the village. And when He had spit on his eyes and laid His hands upon him, He asked, "Do you see anything?" [24] And he looked up and said, "I see men, but they look like trees, walking." [25] Then again He laid His hands upon his eyes; and He looked intently and was restored, and saw everything clearly. [26] And He sent him away to his home, saying, "Do not even enter the village."
________________________
Commentary:
22-25. Normally the cures which Jesus worked were instantaneous; not so in this case. Why? Because the blind man's faith was very weak, it would seem, to begin with. Before curing the eyes of his body, Jesus wanted the man's faith to grow; the more it grew and the more trusting the man became, the more sight Jesus gave him. In this way Jesus acted in keeping with His usual pattern: not working miracles unless there was a right predisposition, yet encouraging a good disposition in the person and giving more grace as he responds to the grace already given.
God's grace is essential even for desiring holy things: "Give us light, Lord. Behold, we need it more than the man who was blind from his birth, for he wished to see the light and could not, whereas nowadays, Lord, no one wishes to see it. Oh, what a hopeless ill is this! Here, my God, must be manifested Thy power and Thy mercy" (St. Teresa, "Exclamations of the Soul to God", 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 Curing of a Blind Man at Bethsaida
[22] And they came to Bethsaida. And some people brought to Him (Jesus) a blind man, and begged Him to touch him. [23] And He took the blind man by the hand, and led him out of the village. And when He had spit on his eyes and laid His hands upon him, He asked, "Do you see anything?" [24] And he looked up and said, "I see men, but they look like trees, walking." [25] Then again He laid His hands upon his eyes; and He looked intently and was restored, and saw everything clearly. [26] And He sent him away to his home, saying, "Do not even enter the village."
________________________
Commentary:
22-25. Normally the cures which Jesus worked were instantaneous; not so in this case. Why? Because the blind man's faith was very weak, it would seem, to begin with. Before curing the eyes of his body, Jesus wanted the man's faith to grow; the more it grew and the more trusting the man became, the more sight Jesus gave him. In this way Jesus acted in keeping with His usual pattern: not working miracles unless there was a right predisposition, yet encouraging a good disposition in the person and giving more grace as he responds to the grace already given.
God's grace is essential even for desiring holy things: "Give us light, Lord. Behold, we need it more than the man who was blind from his birth, for he wished to see the light and could not, whereas nowadays, Lord, no one wishes to see it. Oh, what a hopeless ill is this! Here, my God, must be manifested Thy power and Thy mercy" (St. Teresa, "Exclamations of the Soul to God", 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.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
The Creator and Mankind
It has been demonstrated in our previous reflections that the Maker of all things imposed His will on them. In the firmament and in the elements of earth this will is expressed in what we call nature's laws. They are inflexible. In animals it is instinct which governs invariably. But what rules man? Conscience. This is God's will conveyed to man, telling him to do right and to avoid wrong.
As an example of how conscience acts, take a child who tells his first lie. When for the first time he says what he knows is not so, a blush comes to his countenance. This blush is the external sign of the shock within as nature cries out against falsehood. A confirmed liar shows no external disturbance because he has silenced conscience. Some nations and some individuals have more delicate consciences than others, but there are certain fundamental things which every people and every person feel to be obligatory.
Conscience is the bond between the Creator and the creature. And just as an individual may by carelessness or selfishness or licentiousness distort or destroy conscience, so may nations. We have an instance of this in the degraded and unblushing immorality of ancient Rome, even at the very height of her civilization. But the Creator has nevertheless asserted Himself. Nation after nation that has turned from righteousness has come to a sad end.
And so it is with the individual. He who sows the wind reaps the whirlwind. Often, however, the wicked prosper and the just suffer, but this is because God, if He always rewarded the good and punished the wicked here below, would be a mere employer, not the Lord and Creator. God could stop all the evil in the world instantly if He wished to, but He would then be interfering with the free will He has bestowed on man. For if He punished transgressions of His law on the spot, man would be morally forced to keep it and could give no external manifestation of his submission and loyalty.
So God permits evil in order to leave man free to choose between good and evil. For if there were no evil in the world, man would have no exercise of his liberty, which consists in absolute freedom of choice. If a man could only do right, he would be bound, not free.
Now with liberty goes responsibility. Man must answer for the use he makes of his wondrous gift. This brings him in direct relation with his Maker. The greatest transgressions may be those unseen by one's fellow-man. God alone knows all and sees all. Hence the necessity of a guiding code of morals by which man will be judged. This code is written on the heart of man. It was also given on Mt. Sinai in the Ten Commandments. Even apart from Mt. Sinai's promulgation, is there any one of the Ten Commandments that any decent man would wish to see revoked? Would you respect God if He permitted lying, or stealing, or dishonor to parents, or the lust that would rob you of your wife's affection or your daughter of her virtue? Would you respect God if He did not demand your reverence and obedience?
If God is entitled to our obedience, He is hound to make known to us His law. He might do this in various ways. It is not for us to say how He shall do it. He could command us directly and personally, He could do it by the ministry of angels, He could write His law in the firmament so that all might read it. But He has not chosen to do so. Instead He has made a covenant with mankind, employing human agencies to make known His dispensations. This is a statetnont. It requires proof, which we shall proceed to give shortly.
The covenant between God and man is called religion. Religion comes from the two Latin words re and ligo, which mean to bind back. It signifies the bond by which man is brought back into right relations with God. We, like sheep, had gone astray; individuals and nations had departed from right. God would bring back His erring children, and the ordinary means is by religion. This bond between the Creator and His creature we shall now consider.
I ask you to take up the matter in a fair way, as far as possible without prejudice. Prejudice kills right judgment. In a law suit, see how each party misjudges the other. That is why they must appear before a judge, who hears both sides. In our Civil War see how the North viewed the South and the South the North.
A person who is not a Christian, with difficulty views the Church rightly. Among Christians, behold how one sect regards another, and, above all, see how the sects regard the Catholic Church. Persons who have joined the Catholic Church from other denominations marvel at the way in which they had misunderstood her. Their first and strongest feeling after conversion is how they could have so mistaken and misrepresented her. As a rule, they burn with zeal to have others see her truth and beauty once they have beheld her as she is.
Christ said, speaking of His Church: "As the world has hated me, so will it hate you." In connection with this saying, I have an occurrence to relate. It is given by the late Father Gallwey, the noted Jesuit. Three English gentlemen, who were very literary, had the custom of meeting at one another's homes in turn and discussing literary topics. They read, each time they met, portions of the great masters, - Homer, Virgil, Horace, Dante, Shakespeare, etc. They always concluded by reading a passage from the Bible, the King James version.
It happened that one day they touched on that part wherein Christ uses the words I referred to: "As the world has hated me, so will it hate you." One of the gentlemen remarked on hearing the phrase that it had a meaning for him which it had never had before. Christ, he said, was here giving a characteristic of His Church, - it was to be hated and persecuted by the world. "Now, my friends," he continued, "which of the Christian churches does the world today hate and persecute?"
They went into the matter and concluded that there was but one church in the world with which the world was in opposition, and always had been, the Catholic Church. All the other churches had made friends with the world, were living on good terms with the world. From the Apostles down to the present day, the Catholic Church stood out against the spirit of the world, and the world stood against it.
After these reflections, the three agreed that it was worth while looking into the claims of such a church. They did so, and found to their astonishment that all their lives they were opposed to a church that they did not know. They had taken for granted the statements of her opponents and had arrayed themselves against her. On investigating for themselves, they saw things differently, and were convinced that she was the true Church of Christ. They had the strength of their convictions, for they sought out a priest and applied for admission into the Church. Father Gallwey was the priest and he it is who gives us these particulars.
We shall now, with unprejudiced mind, I trust, consider the matter of religion and its relation to ourselves personally. Please leave others out of the question and reflect on the points which follow as a personal matter between you and your Maker. God and Myself.
_________________________
Adapted from God and Myself, An Inquiry into the True Religion (©1917)
by Martin J Scott, S.J.
As an example of how conscience acts, take a child who tells his first lie. When for the first time he says what he knows is not so, a blush comes to his countenance. This blush is the external sign of the shock within as nature cries out against falsehood. A confirmed liar shows no external disturbance because he has silenced conscience. Some nations and some individuals have more delicate consciences than others, but there are certain fundamental things which every people and every person feel to be obligatory.
Conscience is the bond between the Creator and the creature. And just as an individual may by carelessness or selfishness or licentiousness distort or destroy conscience, so may nations. We have an instance of this in the degraded and unblushing immorality of ancient Rome, even at the very height of her civilization. But the Creator has nevertheless asserted Himself. Nation after nation that has turned from righteousness has come to a sad end.
And so it is with the individual. He who sows the wind reaps the whirlwind. Often, however, the wicked prosper and the just suffer, but this is because God, if He always rewarded the good and punished the wicked here below, would be a mere employer, not the Lord and Creator. God could stop all the evil in the world instantly if He wished to, but He would then be interfering with the free will He has bestowed on man. For if He punished transgressions of His law on the spot, man would be morally forced to keep it and could give no external manifestation of his submission and loyalty.
So God permits evil in order to leave man free to choose between good and evil. For if there were no evil in the world, man would have no exercise of his liberty, which consists in absolute freedom of choice. If a man could only do right, he would be bound, not free.
Now with liberty goes responsibility. Man must answer for the use he makes of his wondrous gift. This brings him in direct relation with his Maker. The greatest transgressions may be those unseen by one's fellow-man. God alone knows all and sees all. Hence the necessity of a guiding code of morals by which man will be judged. This code is written on the heart of man. It was also given on Mt. Sinai in the Ten Commandments. Even apart from Mt. Sinai's promulgation, is there any one of the Ten Commandments that any decent man would wish to see revoked? Would you respect God if He permitted lying, or stealing, or dishonor to parents, or the lust that would rob you of your wife's affection or your daughter of her virtue? Would you respect God if He did not demand your reverence and obedience?
If God is entitled to our obedience, He is hound to make known to us His law. He might do this in various ways. It is not for us to say how He shall do it. He could command us directly and personally, He could do it by the ministry of angels, He could write His law in the firmament so that all might read it. But He has not chosen to do so. Instead He has made a covenant with mankind, employing human agencies to make known His dispensations. This is a statetnont. It requires proof, which we shall proceed to give shortly.
The covenant between God and man is called religion. Religion comes from the two Latin words re and ligo, which mean to bind back. It signifies the bond by which man is brought back into right relations with God. We, like sheep, had gone astray; individuals and nations had departed from right. God would bring back His erring children, and the ordinary means is by religion. This bond between the Creator and His creature we shall now consider.
I ask you to take up the matter in a fair way, as far as possible without prejudice. Prejudice kills right judgment. In a law suit, see how each party misjudges the other. That is why they must appear before a judge, who hears both sides. In our Civil War see how the North viewed the South and the South the North.
A person who is not a Christian, with difficulty views the Church rightly. Among Christians, behold how one sect regards another, and, above all, see how the sects regard the Catholic Church. Persons who have joined the Catholic Church from other denominations marvel at the way in which they had misunderstood her. Their first and strongest feeling after conversion is how they could have so mistaken and misrepresented her. As a rule, they burn with zeal to have others see her truth and beauty once they have beheld her as she is.
Christ said, speaking of His Church: "As the world has hated me, so will it hate you." In connection with this saying, I have an occurrence to relate. It is given by the late Father Gallwey, the noted Jesuit. Three English gentlemen, who were very literary, had the custom of meeting at one another's homes in turn and discussing literary topics. They read, each time they met, portions of the great masters, - Homer, Virgil, Horace, Dante, Shakespeare, etc. They always concluded by reading a passage from the Bible, the King James version.
It happened that one day they touched on that part wherein Christ uses the words I referred to: "As the world has hated me, so will it hate you." One of the gentlemen remarked on hearing the phrase that it had a meaning for him which it had never had before. Christ, he said, was here giving a characteristic of His Church, - it was to be hated and persecuted by the world. "Now, my friends," he continued, "which of the Christian churches does the world today hate and persecute?"
They went into the matter and concluded that there was but one church in the world with which the world was in opposition, and always had been, the Catholic Church. All the other churches had made friends with the world, were living on good terms with the world. From the Apostles down to the present day, the Catholic Church stood out against the spirit of the world, and the world stood against it.
After these reflections, the three agreed that it was worth while looking into the claims of such a church. They did so, and found to their astonishment that all their lives they were opposed to a church that they did not know. They had taken for granted the statements of her opponents and had arrayed themselves against her. On investigating for themselves, they saw things differently, and were convinced that she was the true Church of Christ. They had the strength of their convictions, for they sought out a priest and applied for admission into the Church. Father Gallwey was the priest and he it is who gives us these particulars.
We shall now, with unprejudiced mind, I trust, consider the matter of religion and its relation to ourselves personally. Please leave others out of the question and reflect on the points which follow as a personal matter between you and your Maker. God and Myself.
_________________________
Adapted from God and Myself, An Inquiry into the True Religion (©1917)
by Martin J Scott, S.J.
Building a Catholic Action Plan for Reform
A very timely article from Catholic Culture:
Among the concerns of many Catholics across the world is how to faithfully deal with a bishop who manages his diocese in a manner that undermines or offers little support to the teachings of the Church or its disciplines and norms. Many Catholics feel called to action, but nearly as many feel that they are without an action plan.
I’m one of those tortured souls who have been – especially at times – frustrated into immobility. However, I’m also one of the lucky ones who live in a community with many faithful Catholics. In the absence of this support, it is easy to feel like you are on an island, and the sheer agony of this aloneness has driven many to the point of despair. I’m keenly aware of the pain suffered by many of our readers, whose impassioned letters detailing their untenable situations have given me a window into their plight.
So what to do? Ask your parish priest how one may morally show disagreement with one’s bishop without exhibiting disobedience? Even with a good priest, this would be a very awkward discussion – and many people are without a sound spiritual director to turn to for consultation.
Pope, curial officials discuss proposal to reconcile with SSPX
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Pope Benedict XVI presided over his first major meeting with top Roman Curia officials, an encounter that sources said focused on a proposal to reconcile with followers of the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre.As I understand it, Cardinal Arinze is not please with a universal indult, but until something definite is available, we can pray that the next meeting on March 23 may be fruitful...
More than 20 heads of congregations and pontifical councils attended the Feb. 13 meeting, which was to be followed up by a similar session in late March. No details of the February meeting were made available by the Vatican press office...
Link.
Another look at the report is here at Spero News
Promoting the Culture of Death
"It took just one generation to turn what was considered a war crime into a so-called act of compassion by a husband..." A quote from a Dutch journalist during the Terri Schindler Schiavo murder as reported by Fr. Wade Menezes at the recent Annual Marian Conference here in St. Louis.
So who is on the speaking circuit under the auspices of "bioethics"? None other than two of those most responsible for the horrific murder of Terri Schiavo - her estranged "husband", Michael, and the incompetent judge in pronouncing the death sentence for an innocent woman, the dishonorable George Greer. It is uncertain what direction this symposium will take, but it seems a bit far-fetched to conclude that these two would participate in The University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics 10th Anniversary Symposium if they were to be challenged about their gravely immoral and repugnant actions.
So who is on the speaking circuit under the auspices of "bioethics"? None other than two of those most responsible for the horrific murder of Terri Schiavo - her estranged "husband", Michael, and the incompetent judge in pronouncing the death sentence for an innocent woman, the dishonorable George Greer. It is uncertain what direction this symposium will take, but it seems a bit far-fetched to conclude that these two would participate in The University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics 10th Anniversary Symposium if they were to be challenged about their gravely immoral and repugnant actions.
WCC Meets in Brazil
VATICAN CITY, FEB 14, 2006 (VIS) - Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, is due to participate in the inaugural session of the ninth general assembly of the Geneva-based World Council of Churches (WCC). The meeting is being held at Porto Alegre, Brazil, from February 14 to 23 on the theme: "God in Your Grace, transform the world." . . .Source.
VATICAN CITY, FEB 14, 2006 (VIS) - Benedict XVI has written a message to Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, for the occasion of the ninth general assembly of the Geneva- based World Council of Churches (WCC), which is being held at Porto Alegre, Brazil, from February 14 to 23.Link for this article.
What wrong with this picture?
New San Francisco Archbishop Thinks Gay Propaganda Film Brokeback Mountain is "Very Powerful"
I think I'm going to be sick! Maybe we aren't praying enough?
I think I'm going to be sick! Maybe we aren't praying enough?
Activism: Write to "L'Osservatore Romano" to capitalize pronouns when referring to God
An email making the rounds (and this is a major pet peeve of mine, as I always try to ensure that I follow this respectful practice). I'm passing this on as received:
Dear Friends,
Ave Maria!
As you all know, it has been the centuries-old tradition in the vernacular languages to capitalized pronouns and possessive pronouns referring to Almighty God and to our Divine Lord Jesus. Faithful translations of the Popes' letters and addresses into the vernacular tongues have always maintained this important sign of respect for the majesty of God and the divinity of Our Blessed Lord. The English translations coming now from the English Edition of the Osservatore Romano have systematically stopped this Catholic protocol, most recently in the Pope's encyclical.
Fortunately the expert translators of Papal material into the Portuguese, Italian and Spanish tongues continue to follow this respectful practice which exists also in their own traditions. It is certainly evident that the clergy and faithful in these countries would not accept the introduction of referring to the Divinity in the lower case, and it is equally certain that we should not accept anything less regarding our own Catholic tradition. The respectful reference to God in the upper case, incidentally, is a practice followed also by devout Protestants.
So I am asking all of you, who feel so inspired, to send a letter or e-mail to the Director of the Osservatore Romano, Signor Mario Agnes, expressing your displeasure at this callous and disrespectful practice and requesting that the editors correct the texts on the internet and in any future printed versions.
The email address of the Osservatore is:
ornet@ossrom.va
or [via snail mail to:]
Direttore MARIO AGNES
"L'Osservatore Romano"
00120 Cittá del Vaticano
"And I say to you: Whosoever shall confess Me before men, him shall the Son of Man also confess before the angels of God. But he that shall deny Me before men shall be denied before the angels of God" (Lk. 12, 8-9).
Thank you all and may God bless you.
In Christ,
Father Thomas Carleton
Gospel for Feb 14, Memorial: St. Cyril, Monk, & St. Methodius, Bishop
From: Mark 8:14-21
The Leaven of the Pharisees (Continuation)
[14] Now they had forgotten to bring bread; and they had only one loaf with them in the boat. [15] And He (Jesus) cautioned them, saying, "Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod." [16] And they discussed it with one another, saying, "We have no bread." [17] And being aware of it, Jesus said to them, "Why do you discuss the fact that you have no bread? Do you not yet perceive or understand? Are your hearts hardened? [18] Having eyes do you not see, and having ears do you not hear? And do you not remember? [19] When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?" They said to Him, "Twelve." [20] And the seven for the four thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?" And they said to Him, "Seven." [21] And He said to them, "Do you not yet understand?"
________________________
Commentary:
15-16. In another Gospel passage--Luke 13:20-21 and Matthew 31:33--Jesus uses the simile of the leaven to show the vitality of His teaching. Here "leaven" is used in the sense of bad disposition. In the making of bread, leaven is what causes the dough to rise; the Pharisees' hypocrisy and Herod's dissolute life, stemming from their personal ambition, were the "leaven" which was poisoning from within the "dough" of Israel and which would eventually corrupt it. Jesus seeks to warn His disciples about these dangers, and to have them understand that if they are to take in His doctrine they need a pure and simple heart.
But the disciples fail to understand: "They weren't educated; they weren't very bright, if we judge from their reaction to supernatural things. Finding even the most elementary examples and comparisons beyond their reach, they would turn to the Master and ask: `Explain the parable to us.' When Jesus uses the image of the `leaven' of the Pharisees, they think that He's reproaching them for not having purchased bread....These were the disciples called by our Lord. Such stuff is what Christ chose. And they remain just like that until they are filled with the Holy Spirit and thus become pillars of the Church. They are ordinary people, full of defects and shortcomings, more eager to say than to do. Nevertheless, Jesus calls them to be fishers of men, co-redeemers, dispensers of the grace of God" ([St] J. Escriva, "Christ Is Passing By", 2). The same thing can happen to us. Although we may not be very gifted, the Lord calls us, and love of God and docility to His words will cause to grow in our souls unsuspected fruit of holiness and supernatural effectiveness.
__________________________
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 Leaven of the Pharisees (Continuation)
[14] Now they had forgotten to bring bread; and they had only one loaf with them in the boat. [15] And He (Jesus) cautioned them, saying, "Take heed, beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod." [16] And they discussed it with one another, saying, "We have no bread." [17] And being aware of it, Jesus said to them, "Why do you discuss the fact that you have no bread? Do you not yet perceive or understand? Are your hearts hardened? [18] Having eyes do you not see, and having ears do you not hear? And do you not remember? [19] When I broke the five loaves for the five thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?" They said to Him, "Twelve." [20] And the seven for the four thousand, how many baskets full of broken pieces did you take up?" And they said to Him, "Seven." [21] And He said to them, "Do you not yet understand?"
________________________
Commentary:
15-16. In another Gospel passage--Luke 13:20-21 and Matthew 31:33--Jesus uses the simile of the leaven to show the vitality of His teaching. Here "leaven" is used in the sense of bad disposition. In the making of bread, leaven is what causes the dough to rise; the Pharisees' hypocrisy and Herod's dissolute life, stemming from their personal ambition, were the "leaven" which was poisoning from within the "dough" of Israel and which would eventually corrupt it. Jesus seeks to warn His disciples about these dangers, and to have them understand that if they are to take in His doctrine they need a pure and simple heart.
But the disciples fail to understand: "They weren't educated; they weren't very bright, if we judge from their reaction to supernatural things. Finding even the most elementary examples and comparisons beyond their reach, they would turn to the Master and ask: `Explain the parable to us.' When Jesus uses the image of the `leaven' of the Pharisees, they think that He's reproaching them for not having purchased bread....These were the disciples called by our Lord. Such stuff is what Christ chose. And they remain just like that until they are filled with the Holy Spirit and thus become pillars of the Church. They are ordinary people, full of defects and shortcomings, more eager to say than to do. Nevertheless, Jesus calls them to be fishers of men, co-redeemers, dispensers of the grace of God" ([St] J. Escriva, "Christ Is Passing By", 2). The same thing can happen to us. Although we may not be very gifted, the Lord calls us, and love of God and docility to His words will cause to grow in our souls unsuspected fruit of holiness and supernatural effectiveness.
__________________________
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.
Monday, February 13, 2006
Alter Christus - Purity of Heart
While these reflections are entitled Meditations for Priests, all can benefit from them...
______________________
In a previous recollection we meditated on docility to the Holy Spirit as the source of growth in our spiritual life and of fruitfulness in our ministry. One of the necessary conditions for that docility is purity of heart. Divine grace is a gratuitous gift of God and does not depend upon us, yet it rests with us to prepare the ground for those divine communications and to make them effective, by removing whatever is opposed to God's free action in our soul. This preparatory and very necessary cooperation on our part must frequently be the object of our scrutiny, lest we frustrate many of God's designs for our sanctification and our apostolate by keeping our hearts encumbered with obstacles to the operations of divine grace. Such obstacles are: venial sins, uncontrolled passions, vain and useless preoccupations.
AVOIDING SIN
It is obvious that venial sins, and even imperfections deliberately and habitually admitted in our daily life, are a great hindrance to God's grace. For one thing, as they render the soul less pleasing to God, they may decrease considerably the abundance of His gifts and deprive us of many actual graces. But, independently of that, they tend to make us less and less docile to divine inspirations, because they cloud our spiritual vision, diminish our fervour in resisting temptation and practising virtue, and little by little take away all relish for spiritual things.
The danger is the greater as we easily overlook the serious evil there is in venial sin, and are drawn into its groove imperceptibly, even finding ready pretexts to persuade ourselves that such a course is unavoidable for all but Saints.
We must combat such inclinations in us, by thoughts of faith about the dreadful harm there is in venial sin, by an oft-repeated resolution not to consent deliberately to any offence, not even the smallest, against God, by a firm conviction that God calls us to a life of habitual fidelity and gives us ample grace for it, and by sincere acts of contrition and penance when we have been guilty of deliberate faults.
It is not only actual sins and imperfections that impede the work of God in our soul, but we have another enemy, within the place itself, to keep at bay: our ill-regulated passions, which are the root of sin and against which we are never secure unless we keep a close watch over their movements. Alas! how numerous, how insidious, how tenacious those evil inclinations can be! Pride and vanity, the spirit of independence and disobedience, sensuality, sloth: all these and other forms of self-love are a perpetual menace to the work of the Holy Spirit within us. They tend to warp our views, to vitiate our intentions and spoil our actions.
If then we want to give God free play in our soul, we must keep our passions under control: first of all, with sincere humility acknowledge their presence within us; suppress their actual manifestations, and fight them out mercilessly by opposing contrary virtues to each disorderly affection, so that we may free our heart from those poisonous roots which are so great an obstacle to God's inspirations and are often the reason why sacramental graces and the gifts of the Holy Ghost have so little effect upon our spiritual life.
Dissipation of mind and heart is another great obstacle to our docility to the Holy Spirit. The Divine Master knocks at the door, but we hear Him not, or deliberately turn a deaf ear to His voice: we are too engrossed in vain and useless preoccupations. This dissipation may come from the fickleness of a superficial mind which takes pleasure in petty and frivolous pursuits, or from the strength of worldly allurements that bewitch us, or even - alas! - from our apostolic labours, when we allow ourselves to seek in them natural satisfactions which crowd God out of our mind and heart.
Lava quod est sordidum, Riga quod est aridum, Sana quod est saucium. - Flecte quod est rigidum, Fove quod est frigidum, Rege quod est devium."
"Largire nobis, quaesumus, Domine, semper spiritum cogitandi quae recta sunt, propitius et agendi: ut, qui sine te esse non possumus, secundum te vivere valeamus. Per C.D.N."
__________________________
Adapted from Alter Christus, Meditations for Priests by F.X. L'Hoir, S.J. (1958)
Meditation 26.
###
Please pray for our priests and pray for vocations to the priesthood.
______________________
In a previous recollection we meditated on docility to the Holy Spirit as the source of growth in our spiritual life and of fruitfulness in our ministry. One of the necessary conditions for that docility is purity of heart. Divine grace is a gratuitous gift of God and does not depend upon us, yet it rests with us to prepare the ground for those divine communications and to make them effective, by removing whatever is opposed to God's free action in our soul. This preparatory and very necessary cooperation on our part must frequently be the object of our scrutiny, lest we frustrate many of God's designs for our sanctification and our apostolate by keeping our hearts encumbered with obstacles to the operations of divine grace. Such obstacles are: venial sins, uncontrolled passions, vain and useless preoccupations.
AVOIDING SIN
It is obvious that venial sins, and even imperfections deliberately and habitually admitted in our daily life, are a great hindrance to God's grace. For one thing, as they render the soul less pleasing to God, they may decrease considerably the abundance of His gifts and deprive us of many actual graces. But, independently of that, they tend to make us less and less docile to divine inspirations, because they cloud our spiritual vision, diminish our fervour in resisting temptation and practising virtue, and little by little take away all relish for spiritual things.
The danger is the greater as we easily overlook the serious evil there is in venial sin, and are drawn into its groove imperceptibly, even finding ready pretexts to persuade ourselves that such a course is unavoidable for all but Saints.
We must combat such inclinations in us, by thoughts of faith about the dreadful harm there is in venial sin, by an oft-repeated resolution not to consent deliberately to any offence, not even the smallest, against God, by a firm conviction that God calls us to a life of habitual fidelity and gives us ample grace for it, and by sincere acts of contrition and penance when we have been guilty of deliberate faults.
* If we looked upon our daily life with the eyes with which the Saints looked upon their's, how we would shudder at the presence in our habitual conduct of so much infidelity!WATCHING OVER OUR PASSIONS
Let us pray for a greater horror and holy fear of venial sin. Our daily examination of conscience and our weekly confession ought to keep alive in us those views of faith. Do they? - How great is our generosity in atoning for our sins, and our fervour and confidence in the daily oblation of Christ's expiatory sacrifice "pro innumerabilibus peccatis et offensionibus et negligentiis meis" ? . . .
It is not only actual sins and imperfections that impede the work of God in our soul, but we have another enemy, within the place itself, to keep at bay: our ill-regulated passions, which are the root of sin and against which we are never secure unless we keep a close watch over their movements. Alas! how numerous, how insidious, how tenacious those evil inclinations can be! Pride and vanity, the spirit of independence and disobedience, sensuality, sloth: all these and other forms of self-love are a perpetual menace to the work of the Holy Spirit within us. They tend to warp our views, to vitiate our intentions and spoil our actions.
If then we want to give God free play in our soul, we must keep our passions under control: first of all, with sincere humility acknowledge their presence within us; suppress their actual manifestations, and fight them out mercilessly by opposing contrary virtues to each disorderly affection, so that we may free our heart from those poisonous roots which are so great an obstacle to God's inspirations and are often the reason why sacramental graces and the gifts of the Holy Ghost have so little effect upon our spiritual life.
* Are we humble enough to be poignantly conscious of our constant need of vigilance? Beware of self-complacency in spiritual life, which leaves one imbedded in hopeless mediocrity. - Are we generous and methodical in practising theFREEING OURSELVES FROM ALL VAIN PREOCCUPATIONS
"agere contra"? Do we apply our "particular examen" to uproot our defects? - Let us pray that we may know self and die to self in order to live to Christ: "Domine Jesu, noverim me, noverim Te. . . persequar me, sequar Te."
Dissipation of mind and heart is another great obstacle to our docility to the Holy Spirit. The Divine Master knocks at the door, but we hear Him not, or deliberately turn a deaf ear to His voice: we are too engrossed in vain and useless preoccupations. This dissipation may come from the fickleness of a superficial mind which takes pleasure in petty and frivolous pursuits, or from the strength of worldly allurements that bewitch us, or even - alas! - from our apostolic labours, when we allow ourselves to seek in them natural satisfactions which crowd God out of our mind and heart.
* Are we not squandering some of our time in profitless occupations, readings and conversations, thus living in an atmosphere quite uncongenial to God's operation in our soul, and sowing the seeds of innumerable distractions in prayer? - Let us resolve to keep our heart closed to the seductions of all vain things: "Fascinatio enim nugacitatis obscurat bona", and to give undivided to God a life that has been wholly consecrated to His service by our ordination: "In his quae Patris mei sunt oportet me esse."
Lava quod est sordidum, Riga quod est aridum, Sana quod est saucium. - Flecte quod est rigidum, Fove quod est frigidum, Rege quod est devium."
"Largire nobis, quaesumus, Domine, semper spiritum cogitandi quae recta sunt, propitius et agendi: ut, qui sine te esse non possumus, secundum te vivere valeamus. Per C.D.N."
__________________________
Adapted from Alter Christus, Meditations for Priests by F.X. L'Hoir, S.J. (1958)
Meditation 26.
###
Please pray for our priests and pray for vocations to the priesthood.
Billboard Campaign Offers Way To Change Sexual Orientation
A billboard promising to change homosexuals has caught the attention of several drivers on local highways. The billboards are associated with Focus on the Family-an organization calling itself a Christian group promoting family values.Of course, no story is complete without an opposing "opinion":
"There is nothing to be cured." That's the opinion of Dr. Randi Mozenter, a clinical psychologist. He says homosexuality is not considered an illness or disorder and most people's sexuality falls on a continuum.The story says that Randi is a "he"...She looked like a "she" to me, but then, this is 2006...
Intolerant and ignorant is how some in the gay community describe the church's efforts.Apparently to some, intolerance and ignorance exist only on one side of the issue...
Squashing "Love Won Out" with Vandalism
ST. LOUIS, Missouri, February 13, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Hours after the media announced the location of an international Love Won Out conference for St. Louis to be held Feb. 25, the location was vandalized.People trying to help others are often targets of ridicule and harassment, especially when it comes to issues like this...
The vandalism to First Evangelical Free Church of St. Louis County (First Free) occurred just hours after radio announcements of the location for the event began there Thursday evening. At least a dozen eggs were found spattered over the front of the building when employees arrived there early Friday. Billboards for the event began to appear along St. Louis highways as early as Tuesday. The one-day event is designed to educate and equip attendees on the issues surrounding homosexuality and provide help for those struggling – and those whose loved ones struggle – with unwanted same-sex attractions.
Cardinal Arinze Says Pope Will Fix Liturgical Abuses
VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- The Vatican's top liturgy official said he expects Pope Benedict XVI to move against liturgical abuse with firm teaching and a gentle manner, recognizing that such mistakes often reflect ignorance, not ill will.More here.
At the same time, the pope wants to offer reconciliation to followers of the late French Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre -- but not at the cost of "disowning" the Second Vatican Council, said Cardinal Francis Arinze, the Nigerian who heads the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments.
Cardinal Arinze spoke about the direction of the new papacy in an interview with Catholic News Service in early February. He said he expected important moves -- but not a purge -- to improve liturgy under Pope Benedict.
"I do not expect an aggressive correction of abuses. I don't think the pope is going to use the ecclesiastical hammer," Cardinal Arinze said.
"Pope Benedict has very clear doctrine and convictions. What many people may not know is that he is not rough. He is gentlemanly, in the sense of what the prophet Isaiah said: 'A bruised reed he will not break,'" the cardinal said.
I wonder if we will
"Suppose a priest comes at the beginning of Mass and says: 'Good morning, everybody, did your team win last night?' That's not a liturgical greeting. If you can find it in any liturgical book, I'll give you a turkey," Cardinal Arinze said.I think there may be some special "liturgical books" floating around these parts...
Don't Sign a Life Away
From a recent email... Spread the word:
My fellow Defenders,
Like you, I am a member of the Defenders of Archbishop Burke. I believe that the members of our organization have a deep love for the Catholic Church and are willing to support Archbishop Burke and the things that are important to him.
As you know I have taken a strong public stand against the deceptive "Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative". On November 25th, 2005 Archbishop Burke referred to this petition in his "Archbishop's Column" in the St. Louis Review:"In a particular way, let us work to stop the latest manifestation of the culture of death in our state of Missouri, the initiative to obtain the constitutional guarantee of the right to attack innocent and defenseless human life."Archbishop Burke has authorized an extensive educational effort on this issue in Catholic parishes in an attempt to defeat the petitions and amendment. I think you will agree that our mission is clear. We must, as Archbishop Burke says "work to stop the latest manifestation of the culture of death in our state of Missouri" - the "Missouri Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative".
It is for this reason that I asked Mr. McKenzie to allow me to write this letter to you. I need supporters of Don't Sign a Life Away!. I need people to help spread the word around the state of Missouri. I need people here in St. Louis to help minimize the success of those collecting petitions. I need contributions to help fund bumper stickers, flyers and educational materials to inform citizens about this misleading campaign. I need help distributing this material around the state.
I want to order 100,000 bumper stickers that say "Don't Sign the Cloning Petition!" A quantity like this costs only 5 cents per bumper sticker, but cost $5000 for the entire order. I am looking for funding in many places. Perhaps you would like to contribute.
Now is the time for action! The petition gatherers have just begun. I think they will move on to Kansas City when they finish in St. Louis. Even if they succeed in placing the Amendment on the ballot our work will not have been in vain. Every effort we make now helps to educate voters about the true nature of this amendment and will help us defeat the amendment in November.
Please consider this a personal invitation to become a member of Don't Sign a Life Away! Please visit our website at http://www.dontsignalifeaway.org/ for information about our group and contact information. Or you may simply email me at molly@dontsignalifeaway.org or call me at 636.519.8160.
Mr. McKenzie tells me he sends out approximately 275 emails. I hope that many of you will also see fit to join Don't Sign a Life Away! Together we can stop this thing! Please keep this intention in your prayers, especially that God send many helpers to this state-wide educational campaign.
Gratefully,
Molly McCann
Senator Jim Talent takes new tack on stem cells
In a surprise turnabout, Sen. Jim Talent withdrew his support Friday for a controversial ban on human cloning and offered what he said was a compromise proposal that would heal the deep divide over stem cell research.How can he NOT take a position on Danforth and company's efforts to become mad scientists in their quest to become like God? Is he afraid of "St Jack"?
. . .
Even as Talent outlined his new proposal, saying he'd spent a year researching the issue, he still declined to take a position on a Missouri initiative petition that has made the stem cell debate so hot at home.
"I'm going to cross that bridge when I get to it. I'm not there yet," Talent said Friday of the Missouri initiative, which would protect certain types of embryonic stem cell research. That measure has torn apart the GOP, with key business leaders, Gov. Matt Blunt, and other Republicans backing it and abortion-rights foes staunchly opposing it.Any politician who supports the wanton murder of innocent human life deserves to be rejected at the ballot box. We need to pray that these individuals accept the grace God gives them to see the truth...
Talent said Friday he will promote altered nuclear transfer, or ANT, as a new avenue of research that could end the political impasse. Under ANT, a cell is genetically altered so that it can't ever develop into an embryo. Proponents say the process - still being developed and studied - avoids the dicey questions involved in traditional stem cell research.More here.
Gospel for Monday, 6th Week in Ordinary Time
From: Mark 8:11-13
The Leaven of the Pharisees
[11] The Pharisees came and began to argue with Him (Jesus), seeking from Him a sign from Heaven, to test Him. [12] And He sighed deeply in His spirit, and said, "Why does this generation seek a sign? Truly, I say to you, no sign shall be given to this generation." [13] And He left them, and getting into the boat again He departed to the other side.
______________________
Commentary:
11-12. Jesus expresses the deep sadness He feels at the hardheartedness of the Pharisees: they remain blind and unbelieving despite the light shining around them and the wonderful things Christ is doing. If someone rejects the miracles God has offered him, it is useless for him to demand new signs, because he asks for them not because he is sincerely seeking the truth but out of ill will: he is trying to tempt God (cf. Luke 16:27-31). Requiring new miracles before one will believe, not accepting those already performed in the history of salvation, amounts to asking God to account for Himself before a human tribunal (cf. Romans 2:1-11). Unfortunately, many people do act like this. But God can only be found if we have an open and humble attitude to Him. "I have no need of miracles: there are more than enough for me in the Gospel. But I do need to see you fulfilling your duty and responding to grace" ([St] J. Escriva, "The Way", 362).
12. The generation to which Jesus refers does not include all the people of His time, but only the Pharisees and their followers (cf. Mark 8:38; 9:19; Matthew 11:16), who do not want to see in Jesus' miracles the sign and guarantee of His messianic mission and dignity: they even attribute His miracles to Satan (Matthew 12:28).
If they do not accept the signs offered to them, they will be given no other sign of the spectacular kind they seek, for the Kingdom of God does not come noisily (Luke 17:20-21) and even if it did they in their twisted way would manage to misinterpret the event (Luke 16:31). According to Matthew 12:38-42 and Luke 11:29-32, they are offered yet another sign--the miracle of Jonah, the sign of the death and resurrection of Christ; but not even this remarkable proof will lead the Pharisees to shed their pride.
_______________________
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 Leaven of the Pharisees
[11] The Pharisees came and began to argue with Him (Jesus), seeking from Him a sign from Heaven, to test Him. [12] And He sighed deeply in His spirit, and said, "Why does this generation seek a sign? Truly, I say to you, no sign shall be given to this generation." [13] And He left them, and getting into the boat again He departed to the other side.
______________________
Commentary:
11-12. Jesus expresses the deep sadness He feels at the hardheartedness of the Pharisees: they remain blind and unbelieving despite the light shining around them and the wonderful things Christ is doing. If someone rejects the miracles God has offered him, it is useless for him to demand new signs, because he asks for them not because he is sincerely seeking the truth but out of ill will: he is trying to tempt God (cf. Luke 16:27-31). Requiring new miracles before one will believe, not accepting those already performed in the history of salvation, amounts to asking God to account for Himself before a human tribunal (cf. Romans 2:1-11). Unfortunately, many people do act like this. But God can only be found if we have an open and humble attitude to Him. "I have no need of miracles: there are more than enough for me in the Gospel. But I do need to see you fulfilling your duty and responding to grace" ([St] J. Escriva, "The Way", 362).
12. The generation to which Jesus refers does not include all the people of His time, but only the Pharisees and their followers (cf. Mark 8:38; 9:19; Matthew 11:16), who do not want to see in Jesus' miracles the sign and guarantee of His messianic mission and dignity: they even attribute His miracles to Satan (Matthew 12:28).
If they do not accept the signs offered to them, they will be given no other sign of the spectacular kind they seek, for the Kingdom of God does not come noisily (Luke 17:20-21) and even if it did they in their twisted way would manage to misinterpret the event (Luke 16:31). According to Matthew 12:38-42 and Luke 11:29-32, they are offered yet another sign--the miracle of Jonah, the sign of the death and resurrection of Christ; but not even this remarkable proof will lead the Pharisees to shed their pride.
_______________________
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.
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Czechs at odds over historic church
A shoe scrapes on stone near the tomb of Good King Wenceslas and winter breaths curl against the stained glass, but few of the tourists meandering through St. Vitus Cathedral sense the underlying battle between the secular and the sacred.More here.
Tomas Holub does. "The state should own this church," said Holub, a pilgrim with a nationalist streak standing in a dim light near the altar. "It's the symbol of the Czech nation. Our kings are buried in crypts below, and you can feel their spirits. It changes the dynamics of this place."
The legal struggle between the state and the Catholic Church over ownership of the cathedral is a troubling tour through the ages. . .
The Rev. John H. Miller: Led Catholic Social Action Organization Based in St. Louis
The Rev. John Harold Miller, a Catholic priest who spent 20 years as executive director of a Catholic social action agency, died of cancer Wednesday (Feb. 8, 2006) at Holy Cross House in Notre Dame, Ind. He was 80.
Father Miller was director of the Central Bureau of the Catholic Central Verein of America. The bureau, at 3835 Westminster Place, St. Louis, is the headquarters of the national organization.
He moved to the priests' retirement home in Indiana after retiring in January from the Central Bureau. He had been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer 10 months ago.
A funeral Mass will be celebrated Tuesday at St. Ignatius Church in Austin, Texas. A memorial Mass was celebrated Saturday in Notre Dame.
Father Miller took over as director of the central bureau in 1986 and became editor of the bureau's bi-monthly journal, the Social Justice Review. The publication, with a circulation of about 5,000, goes to members of Congress, bishops and federal judges and various officeholders.
Tom Hoover, archivist and librarian at the central bureau, said Father Miller was a studious man who translated books from French into English and was familiar with seven languages. He enjoyed taking twice-weekly swims at the downtown YMCA and dining at Italian restaurants. "He also had a corny sense of humor that showed he was an affable, humorous fellow," Hoover said.
Father Miller was the youngest of six children. He was born in New Orleans in 1925. He was ordained in 1951 and celebrated his first Mass in St. Peter's Basilica in Rome.
He had studied at the University of Notre Dame and at the Angelicum in Rome, and went to Germany where he received his doctorate in sacred theology from the Theological Faculty at Trier.
He taught theology at Holy Cross College and the Catholic University of America in Washington; at the University of Notre Dame; and at Loyola University of the South and Notre Dame Seminary, both in New Orleans.
He wrote several books about Catholicism, among them "Fundamentals of the Liturgy" and "Signs of Transformation in Christ." In 1963, he became staff editor for liturgy and sacramental theology on the New Catholic Encyclopaedia. He edited eight volumes of the "Yearbook of Liturgical Studies (1960-67)" and "Vatican II - An Interfaith Appraisal (1966)."
He received as appointment in 1964 as consultant to the Papal Post-conciliar Commission for the Reform of the Liturgy. From 1976 to 1980, he served as provincial of the southern province of the Holy Cross Fathers in Austin.
He is survived by many nephews and nieces, mostly in the New Orleans and Detroit areas.
Burial will be in Assumption Cemetery in Austin.
Gospel for the 6th Sunday in Ordinary Time
From: Mark 1:40-45
The Curing of a Leper
[40] And a leper came to Him (Jesus), beseeching Him, and kneeling said to Him, "If You will, You can make me clean." [41] Moved with pity, He stretched out His hand and touched him, and said to him, "I will; be clean." [42] And immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean. [43] And He sternly charged him, and sent him away at once, [44] and said to him, "See that you say nothing to anyone; but go, show yourself to the priest, and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to the people." [45] But he went out and began to talk freely about it, and spread the news, so that Jesus could no longer openly enter a town, but was out in the country; and people came to Him from every quarter.
__________________________
Commentary:
40-44. Leprosy was seen as a punishment from God (cf. Numbers 12:10-15). The disappearance of the disease was regarded as one of the blessings of the messianic times (Isaiah 35:8; cf. Matthew 11:5; Luke 7:22). Because leprosy was contagious, the Law declared that lepers were impure and that they transmitted impurity to those who touched them and to places they entered. Therefore, they had to live apart (Numbers 5:2; 12:14ff) and to show that they were lepers by certain external signs. On the rite of purification, see the note on Matthew 8:4.
[The note on Matthew 8:4 states:
4. According to the Law of Moses (Leviticus 14), if a leper is cured of his disease, he should present himself to a priest, who will register the cure and give him a certificate which he needs to be reintegrated into the civil and religious life of Israel. Leviticus also prescribes the purifications and sacrifice he should offer. Jesus' instruction to the leper is, then, in keeping with the normal way of fulfilling what the laws laid down.]
The passage shows us the faithful and confident prayer of a man needing Jesus' help and begging Him for it, confident that, if Our Lord wishes, He can free him from the disease (cf. Matthew 8:2). "This man prostrated himself on the ground, as a sign of humility and shame, to teach each of us to be ashamed of the stains of his life. But shame should not prevent us from confessing: the leper showed his wound and begged for healing. If You will, he says, You can make me clean; that is, he recognized that the Lord had the power to cure him" (St. Bede, "In Marci Evangelium Expositio, in loc.").
On the discretion and prudence Jesus required regarding His person, see the note on Mark 1:34 and Matthew 9:30.
[The note on Mark 1:34 states:
34. Demons possess a supernatural type of knowledge and therefore they recognize Jesus as the Messiah (Mark 1:24). Through the people they possess they are able to publish this fact. But Our Lord, using His divine powers, orders them to be silent. On other occasions He also silences His disciples (Mark 8:30; 9:9), and He instructs people whom He has cured not to talk about their cure (Mark 1:4; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26). He may have acted in this way to educate the people away from a too human and political idea of the Messiah (Matthew 9:30). Therefore, He first awakens their interest by performing miracles and gradually, through His preaching, gives them a clearer understanding of the kind of Messiah He is.
Some Fathers of the Church point out that Jesus does not want to accept, in support of the truth, the testimony of him who is the father of lies.]
[The note on Matthew 9:30 states:
30. Why did our Lord not want them to publicize the miracle? Because His plan was to gradually manifest Himself as the Messiah, the Son of God. He did not want to anticipate events which would occur in their own good time; nor did He want the crowd to start hailing Him as Messiah King, because their notion of messiah was nationalistic, not a spiritual one. However, the crowd did in fact proclaim Him when he worked the miracles of the loaves and the fish (John 6:14-15): "When the people saw the sign which He had done, they said, `This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world!' Perceiving then that they were about to come and take Him by force to make Him king, Jesus withdrew again to the hills by Himself."]
__________________________
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 Curing of a Leper
[40] And a leper came to Him (Jesus), beseeching Him, and kneeling said to Him, "If You will, You can make me clean." [41] Moved with pity, He stretched out His hand and touched him, and said to him, "I will; be clean." [42] And immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean. [43] And He sternly charged him, and sent him away at once, [44] and said to him, "See that you say nothing to anyone; but go, show yourself to the priest, and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to the people." [45] But he went out and began to talk freely about it, and spread the news, so that Jesus could no longer openly enter a town, but was out in the country; and people came to Him from every quarter.
__________________________
Commentary:
40-44. Leprosy was seen as a punishment from God (cf. Numbers 12:10-15). The disappearance of the disease was regarded as one of the blessings of the messianic times (Isaiah 35:8; cf. Matthew 11:5; Luke 7:22). Because leprosy was contagious, the Law declared that lepers were impure and that they transmitted impurity to those who touched them and to places they entered. Therefore, they had to live apart (Numbers 5:2; 12:14ff) and to show that they were lepers by certain external signs. On the rite of purification, see the note on Matthew 8:4.
[The note on Matthew 8:4 states:
4. According to the Law of Moses (Leviticus 14), if a leper is cured of his disease, he should present himself to a priest, who will register the cure and give him a certificate which he needs to be reintegrated into the civil and religious life of Israel. Leviticus also prescribes the purifications and sacrifice he should offer. Jesus' instruction to the leper is, then, in keeping with the normal way of fulfilling what the laws laid down.]
The passage shows us the faithful and confident prayer of a man needing Jesus' help and begging Him for it, confident that, if Our Lord wishes, He can free him from the disease (cf. Matthew 8:2). "This man prostrated himself on the ground, as a sign of humility and shame, to teach each of us to be ashamed of the stains of his life. But shame should not prevent us from confessing: the leper showed his wound and begged for healing. If You will, he says, You can make me clean; that is, he recognized that the Lord had the power to cure him" (St. Bede, "In Marci Evangelium Expositio, in loc.").
On the discretion and prudence Jesus required regarding His person, see the note on Mark 1:34 and Matthew 9:30.
[The note on Mark 1:34 states:
34. Demons possess a supernatural type of knowledge and therefore they recognize Jesus as the Messiah (Mark 1:24). Through the people they possess they are able to publish this fact. But Our Lord, using His divine powers, orders them to be silent. On other occasions He also silences His disciples (Mark 8:30; 9:9), and He instructs people whom He has cured not to talk about their cure (Mark 1:4; 5:43; 7:36; 8:26). He may have acted in this way to educate the people away from a too human and political idea of the Messiah (Matthew 9:30). Therefore, He first awakens their interest by performing miracles and gradually, through His preaching, gives them a clearer understanding of the kind of Messiah He is.
Some Fathers of the Church point out that Jesus does not want to accept, in support of the truth, the testimony of him who is the father of lies.]
[The note on Matthew 9:30 states:
30. Why did our Lord not want them to publicize the miracle? Because His plan was to gradually manifest Himself as the Messiah, the Son of God. He did not want to anticipate events which would occur in their own good time; nor did He want the crowd to start hailing Him as Messiah King, because their notion of messiah was nationalistic, not a spiritual one. However, the crowd did in fact proclaim Him when he worked the miracles of the loaves and the fish (John 6:14-15): "When the people saw the sign which He had done, they said, `This is indeed the prophet who is to come into the world!' Perceiving then that they were about to come and take Him by force to make Him king, Jesus withdrew again to the hills by Himself."]
__________________________
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)