CATHOLICISM'S 1970'S, ANYTHING GOOD ABOUT IT?

I don't hate the 1970's, I came into my own during that period. I graduated from high school in 1971, worked in the real world, i.e. Dairy Queen and Macy's, bought a car, discerned going into the seminary, and became an adult Catholic and a transitional deacon by the end of 1979. What is there not to love about the 1970's?

Not everything about 1970's Catholicism was bad, but what was bad and there was a lot of it, can't ever be described as good. 

I found a kindred spirit in an article from Commonweal Magazine that touts the glories of the Catholicism of the 1970's. Who can argue with this? My astute comments in "red" within the original text.

That '70s Church

What It Got Right

Cathleen Kaveny

Unpacking some boxes after a recent move from South Bend, Indiana, to Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts, I came across my confirmation stole, which I made in the spring of 1978. The members of my class were told to personalize our stoles to reflect our unique faith journeys. (Why in the name of God were confirmadi given stoles, homemade or not and what difference did it make in their actual day to day lives having made the stole and worn it during their confirmation?) Then completing my first year of Latin, I wrote the word Credo on one panel with Elmer’s Glue in the best cursive I could muster, and then covered the glue with a layer of deep blue glitter. On the other panel, I traced a simple cross, using the same technique. (This was not a theological statement: a crucifix was beyond my severely limited artistic abilities.) To make a border for my stole, I attached the cornflower trim that my late, beloved grandmother had used in sewing my First Communion dress eight years earlier. That dress was Marian blue. The girls in my First Communion class were discouraged from wearing traditional white lace dresses and veils, because they were expensive and impractical. We were all very disappointed at the time. Now, I am grateful. My grandmother’s handmade blue dress with its cornflower trim is a tangible sign of the communion of saints.

I do not remember much about the confirmation ceremony itself. I am pretty sure we sang “On Eagle’s Wings.” Don’t judge—it was the ’70s! I also remember feeling a mixture of accomplishment, relief, and release. We had just completed a demanding two-year program, fulfilling requirements that included weekly classes, multiple service projects, and periodic weekend retreats. Being confirmed meant that we were finally adult Catholics.(I was confirmed in 1962 in the 4th Grade (the year of the Cuban Missal Crisis) in a pre-Vatican II Confirmation Liturgy within the context of Benediction of the Most Blessed Sacrament. All we had to do was to memorize the catechism parts on Confirmation, nothing else. Sacraments are gifts not something we earn. The author of this article points out indirectly the flaw of the 1970's preparation for Confirmation and ongoing today. We have to prove our worth by jumping through hoops rather than simply coming to Mass, knowing our prayers and understanding that faith and good works walk hand in hand and not just in order to get confirmed.) We continued to go to Mass. But for most of us, that was the end of any formal instruction in the faith. Like other adult Catholics, we learned to juggle secular and sacred responsibilities. As time went on, the former began to crowd out the latter. My generation’s connection with the church became more and more attenuated. For many people I know, the connection was finally broken by the revelations about the sexual abuse of minors by priests and the way bishops covered up those crimes. (I was taught as a child that there have always been corrupt popes, bishops and priests, not to mention lay people, and that my Catholicism wasn't to be based upon the sanctity of anyone except God's holiness and that my faith would be tested by God in a variety of life's circumstances and I needed to be prepared for these tests, some of which would be carried out by Satan!)

So, I belong to what many Catholics now dismiss as one of the church’s lost, post–Vatican II generations. Catholic prelates and internet pundits regularly scorn the fifteen years following the Second Vatican Council as the “silly season,” the era in which catechesis was evacuated of all substantive content in favor of supposedly trivial activities such as sharing, caring, and constructing felt banners. The catechesis of the 1970s became a cautionary tale, the model of what not to do in passing on the faith.

For many years, I was sympathetic to that analysis. But I am increasingly uneasy with the wholesale dismissal of the catechetical programs of my youth. First, the stock caricature of the period is unfair. 

The programs had far more content then they are given credit for. Second, the criticism only reinforces polarization within the church. Scapegoating 1970s religious-education programs fosters the illusion that the church’s problems can be fixed by going backward, by inoculating children with something like the simple question-and-answer method and content of the Baltimore Catechism. But the root problem facing the church, then and now, is not catechesis. The root problem is that Catholics didn’t have—and still don’t have—a way of dealing constructively with the substantial and irreversible changes in both the church and the culture. Those changes began before the council and only accelerated in its immediate aftermath. They show no sign of abating today, much less of being reversed. Among those developments were the suburbanization of the Catholic population, the astonishing affluence and high levels of education among post–World War II Catholics, the powerful shift away from Catholic defensiveness and toward ecumenical and interreligious cooperation, and the unprecedented rates of Catholics marrying outside the fold.   (The attempt here is to mislead. Yes, Catholics and many others are better educated today, but not in the Faith. 1950's Catholics knew their faith better than today's. Catholics today are better educated in the secular realm and their particular professions. But as far as the faith is concerned, it is superficial. They don't know even the basics which the Baltimore Catechism gives. Denigrating the BC and saying using it is going backwards is hogwash. Sometimes when we take the wrong road forward we have to make a u-turn to get back on the right road.)

How did religious instruction try to deal with these changes? My parochial elementary school used the very popular Life, Love, Joy series published by Silver Burdett and written by Carl Pfeifer and Janaan Manternach. My own textbooks have long gone to their eternal reward. But my mother, who taught sixth-grade CCD for many years, held on to her old teacher’s handbook, which I recently perused. The content is surprisingly rich. The series proclaims itself to be “grounded in the traditional teaching and practices of the Catholic Church, while respecting recent developments in the theological and social sciences.” Among the theological developments it reflects is the emphasis on Scripture called for by Vatican II. The theme of sixth-grade religious education was “Growth in the Spirit,” which is explored in units titled: “Abraham and the Mystery of Faith,” “Moses and the Mystery of Freedom,” “David and the Mystery of Service,” and “Jeremiah and the Mystery of Hope.” 

The series took care to emphasize that these mysteries were deepened and revealed in Christ Jesus, and passed on in their fullest form in the Catholic tradition. A final unit in the book reinforces the Christocentric understanding of the themes by reflecting on the meaning of major Catholic holy days.

Judging by this text, the content of the series was both rich and deep. So what was the problem? 

Some Catholics have claimed that students were not sufficiently drilled with objective, impersonal, timeless propositions and rules. It is true that the emphasis in my program was on fostering personal and conscientious appropriation of a Catholic worldview, rather than on inculcating a set of prefabricated questions and answers. As I recently learned, the reason for this new approach was historical. Catholics were appalled by the carnage of the Second World War and the unimaginable evil of the Holocaust, and they were horrified by the possibility of a nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union. Questions about the moral presumptions of the modern state, including the United States, had to be asked. Catechism-trained Catholics had participated in the Nazi horrors, often with blind obedience to authority. The goal of post–Vatican II Catholic catechesis was not to foster obedience, but instead to cultivate responsible men and women who were shaped by the Catholic Christian vision, sensitive to our debt to the Jewish people, and independent enough to stand up to injustice, even if sanctioned by church or state. (This paragraph only tells part of the story, but what isn't told is that this is a very individualistic approach to the Faith based upon the 1970's Pepsi Generation, the ME GENERATION. It is what I do and to hell with authority and obedience. This infected religious life where nuns in particular went and found their own ministries and were no longer assigned by their superiors who relinquished their authority. There is nothing good about this approach and what has come about in the Church both in the religious and laity is a decline not a new springtime!)

So the pedagogical strategy of Life, Love, Joy made sense in itself. It was overcome, however, by a wave of superseding events. My overwhelming impression of the church in which I grew up was instability. In first grade, the nuns at my parochial school wore long habits; in second grade, they wore short habits; and in third grade, they wore no habits. When I was a fourth-grader, the parochial school closed, and I went to public school from then on. First Communion was originally administered in first grade, and then it was administered in second grade. First confession was held before First Communion, then it was after First Communion, and then it was off on its own, in fifth grade. Parish music and décor changed radically with each pastor. The votive candles mysteriously disappeared one day and the tabernacle seemed to be on walkabout in the front of the church.

The culture was changing rapidly as well. Women were joining—and remaining in—the workforce in great numbers. Marriages were breaking up. Even the country seemed to be breaking up, as the battles over Vietnam were succeeded by the scandals of Watergate, which dominated television and newspapers.

My generation was not lost because of religious miseducation. It was lost because of the changes in the culture. No CCD program, no matter how rich and nuanced, could overcome the challenges created by the simultaneous breakdown and reconfiguration of the institutional Catholic world and the American social world.

Many influential prelates and lay Catholics now say that it is better to create a bulwark against the chaos, by presenting Catholic teaching and moral rules in a classical, timeless manner. The new Catechism seems to encourage just that. It abstracts doctrinal propositions not only from the context in which they were formulated, but also from the documents in which they were promulgated. This obscures the various levels of authority attributed to the various doctrines. It presents Catholic belief in the manner of a tax code.

I don’t think this will work. More important, if the vast numbers of young Catholics who continue to leave the church is any indication, it is not working. In fact, the glaring disjunction between an ahistorical presentation of Catholic teaching and the rapid pace of ecclesial and social change is likely to prompt even more skepticism and cynicism. I think that in the long run, the only solution is to teach young people how to think and pray within the context of a tradition that is not exempt from historical development and change.

The Roman Catholic tradition does not need to be afraid of history; its central claim is that God became a man who fully experienced the contingencies of life in a certain time and place. The relationship between eternity and history has always been porous. In order to articulate eternal aspects of relationships within the Godhead, for example, early Christian theologians drew upon concepts deeply tied to particular times, places, and philosophical schools. We are not God. We cannot escape the historically conditioned aspects of our tradition. Guided by the Holy Spirit, our community can come to a deeper understanding of the mysteries of our faith as it moves through time. God willing, it can even correct its mistakes—such as its acceptance of slavery and its absolute prohibition of lending money at interest.

Growing up Catholic in the 1970s gave me the sense that the church was unstable, even fickle. It also, however, gave me some wonderful role models for trusting in God’s fidelity in tumultuous times. Our CCD teachers were young wives and mothers who had grown up with the Baltimore Catechism. (This hits the nail on the head and explains why there are so many "nones" and nominal Catholics today. They simply don't take the Church seriously. She lost credibility through banal and silly changes, beginning first with the liturgy and then the complete loss of Catholic culture in favor of secular inculturation.)

Unlike their own children, most of them had gone to parochial schools. No one had taken the time to explain to them the continuities between the pre–Vatican II era and the post–Vatican II era. They had to figure it out for themselves. And they did figure it out, because handing on their faith to their children was important to them. They were not nostalgic about their own religious education, because they had an intuitive sense of its limitations. At times uncomfortable about the scope and nature of the change, they put their trust in God’s providence.

I admire these women tremendously. Their example prepared me for life as an adult in a changing church much better than any amount of memorization ever could have. And I thank God for the communion of saints, those among the living as well as those in paradise.

ATHEIST CAMILLE PAGLIA CALLS OUT PLANNED PARENTHOOD, JON STEWARD, THE LIBERAL MEDIA, ANTI-RELIGION ATHEISTS, THE POLTICIZATION OF SEX AND FINALLY AND MOST ACCURATELY COMPARES BILL CLINTON TO BILL COSBY, THE TWO BILLS!

While CAMILLE and I are miles apart, I like her truthfulness, something quite novel for liberals! Although an atheist, I detect a Catholic ethos in her ethics, apart from reproductive rights, but her ability at critical thinking seems to be informed by Catholicism. I could be wrong.

This is stunning! And you have to read the complete interview link at the end of this post:

Top Feminist Issues Stunning Rebuke For Media’s ‘Total Silence’ On Planned Parenthood

BLAKE NEFF

A major feminist author and former Planned Parenthood member shredded the U.S. media Wednesday for its “shockingly unprofessional” failure to cover the release of secret videos showing alleged trafficking in fetal organs by employees of Planned Parenthood.

Camille Paglia, a self-described “dissident feminist” and widely-syndicated cultural critic, made her remarks as part of a three-day interview series with the website Salon. She was discussing her overall displeasure with the modern state of the American media, and said the case of Planned Parenthood was a key recent example of its decline:

Now let me give you a recent example of the persisting insularity of liberal thought in the media.  When the first secret Planned Parenthood video was released in mid-July, anyone who looks only at liberal media was kept totally in the dark about it, even after the second video was released.  But the videos were being run nonstop all over conservative talk shows on radio and television.  It was a huge and disturbing story, but there was total silence in the liberal media.  That kind of censorship was shockingly unprofessional.  The liberal major media were trying to bury the story by ignoring it.  Now I am a former member of Planned Parenthood and a strong supporter of unconstrained reproductive rights.  But I was horrified and disgusted by those videos and immediately felt there were serious breaches of medical ethics in the conduct of Planned Parenthood officials.  But here’s my point:  it is everyone’s obligation, whatever your political views, to look at both liberal and conservative news sources every single day.  You need a full range of viewpoints to understand what is going on in the world.

Paglia’s criticism is telling, as it comes from a proud and long-time left-wing voice. Elsewhere in the interview, she described herself as a Martin O’Malley supporter, though she says she would “happily” vote for Bernie Sanders as well.(RELATED: Planned Parenthood’s PR Firm Is Asking Reporters Not To Air Undercover Video)

Nevertheless, Paglia also shows a tremendous amount of displeasure with many of her fellow progressives. Besides her Planned Parenthood complain, Paglia also attacked The Daily Show’s Jon Stewart, saying he was emblematic of the “vacuity” of modern comedy: 

I cannot stand that smug, snarky, superior tone. I hated the fact that young people were getting their news through that filter of sophomoric snark. … I’m sorry, but Jon Stewart is not a major figure. He’s certainly a highly successful T.V. personality, but I think he has debased political discourse.  I find nothing incisive in his work.  As for his influence, if he helped produce the hackneyed polarization of moral liberals versus evil conservatives, then he’s partly at fault for the political stalemate in the United States.

Also, despite being a self-professed atheist, Paglia said she was disgusted by the work of prominent anti-religion authors like Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins:

I regard them as adolescents. I say in the introduction to my last book, “Glittering Images”, that “Sneering at religion is juvenile, symptomatic of a stunted imagination.”  It exposes a state of perpetual adolescence that has something to do with their parents– they’re still sneering at dad in some way. … I’m speaking here as an atheist. I don’t believe there is a God, but I respect every religion deeply. All the great world religions contain a complex system of beliefs regarding the nature of the universe and human life that is far more profound than anything that liberalism has produced. We have a whole generation of young people who are clinging to politics and to politicized visions of sexuality for their belief system.  They see nothing but politics, but politics is tiny.  Politics applies only to society. There is a huge metaphysical realm out there that involves the eternal principles of life and death. The great tragic texts, including the plays of Aeschylus and Sophocles, no longer have the central status they once had in education, because we have steadily moved away from the heritage of western civilization.

The real problem is a lack of knowledge of religion as well as a lack of respect for religion. I find it completely hypocritical for people in academe or the media to demand understanding of Muslim beliefs and yet be so derisive and dismissive of the devout Christian beliefs of Southern conservatives.

Paglia’s comments continue a streak that began Tuesday, when she compared Bill Clinton to Bill Cosby and criticized Columbia University for allowing Emma Sulkowicz, or “Mattress Girl,” to carry her mattress on stage at graduation. (RELATED: Mattress Girl Carries Her Mattress To Graduation)

To read Paglia’s whole interview, go here >

Read more:  http://dailycaller.com/2015/07/29/top-feminist-issues-stunning-rebuke-for-medias-total-silence-on-planned-parenthood/#ixzz3hJ6FDNlI

MORE ON THE DICTATORSHIP OF PRESIDENT OBAMA'S ATTEMPT AT THE IDEOLOGICAL COLONIZATION OF AFRICA

As a follow up to yesterday's post on President Obama's arrogance in Africa and everywhere, actually, Catholic News Service has this very good article. The Africans aren't taking President Obama's dictatorship of trying to colonize Africa with the West's corrupt homosexual ideologies:

African leaders counter Obama's 'ideological colonization' in Kenya

US president Barack Obama speaks at Georgetown University, May 12, 2015. Credit: Matt Hadro/CNA.

Nairobi, Kenya, Jul 28, 2015 / 02:25 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- U.S. president Barack Obama has come under fire from African politicians and Church leaders after advocating for gay rights in Kenya this weekend – a practice Pope Francis has referred to as “ideological colonization.”

“Even if people don’t like us for it, our Church has always said homosexuality is unnatural and marriage is between a man and a woman,” Cardinal John Onaiyekan of Abuja told the News Agency of Nigeria July 26.

He stressed that “there is no question of the Catholic Church changing its positions on this matter.”

Archbishop Charles Palmer-Buckle of Accra, a Ghanaian, also weighed in on the U.S. president’s comments, emphasizing that for the Church, homosexual activity is both contrary to the law of God and “anti-human,” Breitbart News reports.

He said that although the Church respects homosexual individuals since they are created in the image and likeness of God, it cannot support homosexual acts and is committed to upholding “the fundamental truth about marriage and family life.”

Cardinal Onaiyekan and Archbishop Palmer Buckle’s comments fell the day after Obama advocated for gay rights during his two-day visit to Kenya, after which he travelled to Ethiopia.

In his July 25 speech at a joint news conference with his Kenyan counterpart, President Uhuru Kenyatta, Obama spoke out about the importance of gay rights, despite requests from Kenya’s leaders to not address the issue. Homosexual acts are illegal in Kenya, as well as several other African countries.

“With respect to the rights of gays and lesbians, I have been consistent all across Africa on this,” Obama said. “I believe in the principle of treating people equally under the law and that they are deserving of equal protection under the law and that the State should not discriminate against the people based on their sexual orientation.”

Prior to Obama’s visit, 700 evangelical pastors wrote an open letter asking the president not to use the trip as an occasion to push the homosexual agenda.

Mark Kariuki, who leads of an alliance of 38,000 churches and 10 million Kenyan Christians, was the primary author of the letter.

“We do not want (Obama) to come and talk on homosexuality in Kenya or push us to accepting that which is against our faith and culture,” Kariuki wrote.

In response to Obama’s comments, Kenyatta noted that while the U.S. and Kenya hold many values and goals in common, such as democracy and entrepreneurship, gay rights is not one of them.

“It is very difficult for us to be able to impose on people that which they themselves do not accept. This is why I repeatedly say for Kenyans today, the issue of gay rights is generally a non-issue. We want to focus on other areas.”

Both Kenya's deputy president, William Ruto, and the speaker of its National Assembly, Justin Muturi, spoke publicly against same-sex marriage in the day's leading up to Obama's visit.

Bishop Emmanuel Badejo of Oyo, who is Nigerian, responded to Obama's advocacy saying, “Most Africans care about religious values, about the family, about the complementary nature of man and woman and the culture that makes us Africans. Why can we not choose what 'benevolence' to accept from the West? Why can we not just be helped to fight corruption, terrorism, unemployment disease and illiteracy?”

“Nobody should be killed for private wayward or immoral behaviors that do not compromise other people's lives,” the bishop affirmed, “but that does not mean all kinds of exotic sexual adventure must be foisted on other nationalities in the name of rights.”

“America claims to be a great democracy and the proof of that fact will be found in her capacity for sincere dialogue and readiness to respect the legitimate values and world view of other peoples,” Bishop Badejo concluded.

The negative response to Obama's advocacy come amid other responses to what Pope Francis has called the “ideological colonization” of poorer countries by wealthy Western nations.

Pope Francis has frequently spoken out against aid and humanitarian organizations which make support of gay rights, abortion, and birth control a condition for receiving assistance. Speaking in Manila Jan. 16, the Pope decried the “new ideological colonization that tries to destroy the family,” warning against efforts “to redefine the very institution of marriage.”

A few days later, Pope Francis again cautioned against this new form of colonialism: “A people enters with an idea that has nothing nothing to do with the nation … and they colonize the people with an idea that changes, or wants to change, a mentality or a structure," he said Jan. 19 during a press conference on his return flight to Rome from the Philippines.

The Pope's statements have been echoed by bishops across the developing world.

At the beginning of July, the Nigerian bishops conference issued a statement reacting to the legalization of same-sex marriage in Ireland and the U.S.

In their statement, the bishops re-emphasized that “marriage is the sacred union of one man and one woman for the begetting and care of children.”

The Nigerian bishops voiced concern that countries such as Canada, Spain, France, United Kingdom, Ireland, and the U.S., which have approved such unions and which hold profound influence over Africa, will begin to influence people’s opinion on the matter.

These countries, they noted, “also give generous humanitarian aid to various establishments and projects in our country and continent.”

Cardinal Luis Tagle of Manila has noted that foreign aid given to the Philippines is oftentimes is linked to some measures that the receiving country is somehow forced to accept … some of the conditions for the aid seem to be an acceptance or a welcoming of some views regarding marriage, or sexuality, or what, which could be alien to the vision of the receiving country or culture.”

And Bishop Badejo, the Nigerian who chairs communications for the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM), said in a February interview with Aleteia that the U.S. has made its help in fighting the radical Islamist group Boko Haram contingent on the Nigeria's support of homosexual acts.

“The United States actually said it would help Nigeria with Boko Haram only if we modify our laws concerning homosexuality, family planning and birth control,” he said.

“It’s very clear that a cultural imperialism exists. In fact, I think that Africa is suffering greatly from a cultural imperialism that threatens to erode our cultural values.”

Bishop Badejo called the U.S. decision “criminal,” saying that if the West boasts of the value they place on human freedom, they shouldn’t try to impose values on Africa with which its people do not agree.

“It is part of human freedom … if the West cherishes freedom for gays and homosexual unions and abortion and contraception, suppose Africans are not wired that way,” he said.

“There is a diminishing sense of the respect for the sanctity of life. And all of this is to be imposed on Africa, at whatever cost: we think that it is immoral and that it is unjust.”

FATHER GEORGE RUTLER PRETTY WELL SUMS UP THE CORRUPTION OF LIBERAL POLITICS AND LIBERAL CATHOLICISM: BRADY! CECIL! MORE IMPORTANT THAN UNBORN CHILDREN DESTINED FOR THE SLAUGHTER!

The # 1 News story--he's so important!

The # 2 News story, this animal is so important! 

 Jimmy Kimmel cries over the killing of Cecil the Lion above by an American dentist hunter in Zimbabwe and advocates for the lion, so precious is his life:

 This isn't a News story at all, completely unimportant compared to football criminals and lions who tug at your heart and comedians who cry at their demise!

 
I'm watching CBS Morning News this morning and the lead story and a lengthy one is all about Tom Brady, a sideshow in NFL Football, a billion dollar industry. Never mind about the actual news, celebrity trumps actual news. CBS is entertainment, news is a sideshow.

 I just watched on CBS This Morning about the international outrage over the death of Cecil a lion in Zimbabwe. Jimmy Kimmel actually started to cry during his comedy routine talking about it. A 15 year old lion was shot by a hunter who lured the famous lion out of a preserve. It is sad. But is it as sad as millions upon millions of babies being slaughtered through abortion and Planned Parenthood selling the body parts of those they murder?  Does Jimmy Kimmel cry on national TV over that? No , he knows better than to do that as he would be blacklisted by the industry as would-be or suspected communists were in the 1950's! Liberals know no shame, as conservatives in the1950's!!!!

Father George Rutler in his article in First Things pretty well sums up the evils of liberalism. Of course liberalism is a political category but more and more assigned to the Catholic Faith or at least some of the Faithful, although that can be debated (being faithful, that is). Certainly we have seen on these pages that conservatives can be heterodox too. I fight the losing battle of trying to promote the correct category of critique in the Church, that of orthodox and heterodox, or faithfulness and unfaithfulness, but most prefer the politicized conservative and liberal labels.

But here is Fr. Rutler's erudite article and I just love his use of similes. My high school English teacher would give him an A+.

The Pity of Christ

Fr. George W. Rutler

Christ cannot be psychoanalyzed because he is perfect.  It would be like seeking flaws in pure crystal or long shadows at high noon. That is why he may seem from our fallen state in a singularly ill-contrived world as both severe and merciful, ethereal and common, rebellious and routine, rustic and royal, solitary and brotherly, young and ageless.  His perfection is a stubborn enigma to the imperfect, but if there is to be one hint of the art that moves his mind, it will be in his pity.  It will be in his pity for the whole world when he weeps over Jerusalem; but most wrenchingly it will be in his pity for each soul when he sees us scattered on the hills like sheep without a shepherd.

He warned about wolves in sheep’s clothing (Matt.7:15) and that disguise was the cunning deceit and dark tragedy of the modern age.  The modern wolves, those seductive tyrants and demagogues, wandered freely and devoured as they did because they were given fertile pasture and friendly forests by a stranger creature in more subtle disguise. Churchill detected it when he called Clement Attlee a sheep in sheep’s clothing.  Here is the moral weakling who thinks the wolf is a sheep because he sees no difference between the two and if he did, he could not care less.  Malcolm Muggeridge wrote in “The Great Liberal Death Wish”:

Not Bolshevism, which Stalin liquidated along with all the old Bolsheviks; not Nazism, which perished along with Hitler in his Berlin bunker; not Fascism, which was left hanging upside down, along with Mussolini and his mistress, from a lamp-post—none of these, history will record, was responsible for bringing down the darkness on our civilization, but liberalism. A solvent rather than a precipitate, a sedative rather than a stimulant, a slough rather than a precipice, blurring the edges of truth, the definition of virtue, the shape of beauty; a cracked bell, a mist, a death wish.

Now that Planned Parenthood has been exposed for those who have willfully been blind during these years of its atrocities, all that its CEO could sheepishly manage to say of a Senior Director of Medical Services sipping wine as she cited prices for infants’ body parts, was that her “tone” was “inappropriate” and “unacceptable.”  Cecile Richards, who employs Dr. Nucatola, draws a salary of half a million dollars from the $528 million dollars of taxpayers money which our government contributed last year to Planned Parenthood’s annual budget.  That same week, 94-year-old Oskar Gröning, who had been a functionary in Auschwitz, was convicted by a German court on 300,000 counts of accessory to murder.  He admitted knowing something was wrong when a camp guard grabbed a crying baby and smashed its head against a wall.  With untutored diction and uncoordinated syntax, Dr. Nucatola blithely spoke of ways to crush a baby’s skull. Affecting Latinity with which we may assume she is otherwise unfamiliar, she called it a “calvarium.”  Has anyone heard of Calvary?  In terms of the number of inflicted deaths and consequent dismemberments and experiments, Dr. Nucatola makes Dr. Mengele seem like Florence Nightingale.

Yet Richards, a sheep in sheep’s clothing, could only manage to say that her “tone” was “inappropriate” and “unacceptable.”  But the next day, Richards angrily backtracked and insisted that such horrific procedures promote scientific research. Benjamin Franklin said, “Never ruin an apology with an excuse.” Richards ruined it. Her words were a descant on those of the Nazi doctor Julius Hallerworden, trying to justify himself at the 1945 Nuremberg trials: “If you are going to kill all these people, at least take the brains out so that the material may be utilized.” A few days later, and awkwardly for Richards who insisted that the body parts were not being sold for profit, another “medical director,” the coarse Mary Gattner was filmed saying, “It’s  been years since I’ve talked about compensation, so let me find out what others are getting, and if it’s in the ballpark then that’s fine. And if it’s still low, then we can bump it up—I want a Lamborghini,”

For several years, the Manhattan headquarters of Planned Parenthood have been directly across the street from my church and its school building, where children learn to read and write while smaller children are being dismembered in the opposite building.  They have sold their 70,000 square feet of condominium space for $35 million and have moved downtown near the Church of Our Lady of Victory where I also once served.  I thought of the dutiful exterminator—an indispensable figure in New York—who came with his fatal sprays on Memorial Day.  I expressed surprise that he had come on a holiday, to which he replied, “Rev, roaches don’t take holidays.”  True, they move from one place to another, always “roaming about” like Satan—and like abortionists.

At the time of the Planned Parenthood exposé, a young Muslim killed five armed forces personnel in Chatanooga and the White House issued no formal statement.   During a conversation on other matters, President Obama managed sheepishly to say that it was a “heartbreaking circumstance” and then he issued a statement wishing Muslims  “Eid Mubarak”—a blessed last day of Ramadan—and in New York, rather than dimming in grief, the Empire State Building was lit up in Islamic green lights. One remembered how Obama said in a United Nations speech in 2013: “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” While he was quick to go into deep mourning for Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, and Freddie Gray, Obama neglected to grieve for Kathryn Steinle whose murder by an illegal immigrant was politically inconvenient.  Only after several days did he yield to public pressure and lower the White House flag to half mast for the soldiers.

In contrast, a mere few hours after the Supreme Court decision on same-sex unions, he had the White House, a national building, turned into a political billboard illuminated in rainbow colors.  Obama’s “heartbreaking” epicene angst was another instance of a sheep in sheep’s clothing, and as the bodies of the soldiers were being prepared for burial, he attended a Broadway show and played a round of golf.  The liberal death wish became raucous when CNN national security analyst Tom Fuentes said of the shooter Muhammad Youssed Abdulazeez, “I know what the name sounds like, but we don’t know it’s a Muslim name.” Now, the murderer was not Luther Abdulazeez, or Calvin Abdulazeez, or Wesley Abdulazeez.  There are few Lutheran or Presbyterian or Methodist chaps baptized Muhammad.

In The Abolition of Man, C.S. Lewis called these sheep in sheep’s clothing “men without chests” because their perception of reality lacks objective moral reason.  Consequently, they really have no heart, if the heart is the seat of a righteous will, and thus they are ruled by whim, incapable of courage. The eagle on the Great Seal of the United States has arrows and an olive branch, but the sheep in sheep’s clothing would carry a limp pre-Raphaelite lily.  For them infanticide is no big matter provided it is described in gentle tones; and the shooting of unarmed soldiers (deprived of defensive weapons by the sheep in sheep’s clothing) is just “heartbreaking.”  That is easy to say for men without true hearts, but it is not what men with chests would say. Varro did not wispily call the slaughter of his sixteen legions at Cannae “heartbreaking,” nor did Boudicca of her 80,000 lost men, nor did Lincoln when cannons fired on Fort Sumter, nor did Congress when Pearl Harbor was attacked.  For that matter, Jesus did not say that the collapse of the tower of Siloam was heartbreaking.  He said, Repent (Luke 13:4).  And we know what he said about those who harm the least of these little ones.  From the depths of the sea, they may find the “tone” of God’s judgment “inappropriate.”  And they will learn that Obama’s blasphemous prayer in Washington on April 26, 2013,  “God bless Planned Parenthood,” fell on deaf ears in the heavenly realms.

It is telling that Obama once masqueraded as an august moral paragon to define sin as “Being out of alignment with my values.”  Thus speaks the sheep in sheep’s clothing.  Thus speak men without chests.  They are in our legislatures, and universities and corporate headquarters and sometimes sadly in our churches, for offensive to the Good Shepherd is a sheepish shepherd who has no chest on which to hang his pectoral cross.  Their fabricated world is like the Ivor Novello song “The Land That Might Have Been” that dreams: “Somewhere there is another land / Different from this world.”  In that other land, it is even considered courageous for those without chests to proclaim that men are women and women are men, and that marriage can be turned inside out by the opinion of a Supreme Court judge who lamely thinks that he is a philosopher by the merits of ingenious telepathy from Hell.  But because “The Land that Might Have Been” is fantasy and not Heaven, it is devoid of all joy and soaked in perpetual melancholy.

General Patton was thought by some not to have much pity.  But he had a chest.  When he entered Ohrdruf, the sub-camp of Buchenwald, his reaction to the corpses and crematoria surprised his soldiers.  He did not say the lurid scene was “inappropriate” or “unacceptable” or “heartbreaking.” He bent over and vomited.  And the medals on his chest rattled. When the people who lived outside the camps protested that they did not know what had been going on, General Eisenhower ordered them to walk through the fetid buildings and look at the corpses.  Perhaps there will be a day when remnants of our sheepish generation are dragged through the moral carnage of our land and feel some of the pity that Christ feels for us.

PROGRESSIVES TRANSFER TRADITIONAL CATHOLIC GUILT FROM SEX TO THE ENVIRONMENT!

We pre-Vatican II Catholics know about Catholic guilt. It revolves around sex, sex, sex.

Of course progressives will have none of that! My body, my life, my way or the highway. Thus Humanae Vitae is derided as outdated precisely because Catholic guilt concerning sex is just way to personal. Sex goes to the core of who we are and no one wants to feel guilty about who they are.

But it is human to want to feel guilty about something and to want others to feel guilty too.

And thus, just like the 1970's, we are being made to feel guilty about all the social issues that we either can't change (unlike our sexual immoral behaviors) or will not change because no one would put up with what one has to do to change it.

Think about our American bishops in the1970's and 80's writing letters on the economy,on war and nuclear disarmament and the like. Usually they wrote on things outside of their competence. But what can rank and file Catholics do about war, nuclear weapons, and the like and when we poor old priests at that time had to communicate the Bishop's ideologies to our congregations, we were clobbered especially in the south with so many military installations. And what do I know about economics?

Meanwhile priests break their vows and promises, bishops ignore it or coddle them and pray they'll stop in their new cushy assignments. You'd think after a hundred of these assignments and hundreds of breaking of vows and promises there would be some moral outrage. But alas no, at least not from those in charge.

And today, we continue to pay for the sins of our bishops and there is no end in sight for this and the decline it has caused in Church attendance and the credibility of the Church's moral voice.

But now a liturgy blog has a post on what is new Catholic guilt especially as it regards air conditioning. But there are other things too where guilt is heaped upon Catholics and some of them, especially the progressives who need to have something to feel guilty about, are eating it up in the most self-righteous ways possible.

READ for yourself, from Praytell:

“Laudato Si” and Liturgical Life — Example 2: How We Assemble for Worship

Jul 27

Posted by Teresa Berger 
 

I keep thinking about the implications of Pope Francis’s Encyclical Laudato Si for liturgical life.  Today, I ponder some concrete elements of how we assemble for worship.

First, there is the uncomfortable truth that churches are big consumers of energy, and quite a bit of that consumption happens on Sunday morning.  Let’s take the parish of St. Routine as an example.

  Many of the faithful drive to Mass, often one person or one couple per car.  St. Routine’s sizeable parking lot, with conventional asphalt pavement, eases the driving worshippers’ access to the sanctuary.  The sanctuary itself is air-conditioned, usually below 74-76 degrees (a recent article in the New York Times on America’s addiction to over-air-conditioning made the intriguing point that it serves as a sign of power and prestige to make people feel cold:  WholeFoods is chillier than Krogers, and Krogers is colder than Piggly Wiggly. — The differing temperatures between “prestigious” and store-front churches will map onto this).

But of course all this is only the beginning of Sunday morning at St. Routine. We have barely entered the sanctuary.  St. Routine, being a nice and welcoming church, has its doors wide open before Mass — never mind the air-conditioning that escapes from the interior.  Once inside the cool sanctuary, worshippers celebrate what is by most counts a beautiful liturgy – un-troubled of course by the humanly-engineered threat of ecocide and the desperate need for creation-care (although resources for such liturgical creation care abound, e.g., by the British organization “Green Christian” (http://www.greenchristian.org.uk/) which offers online resources like a “prayer guide” and “worship materials”).  St. Routine will also never go through a “Greening Congregations Program” (at Earth Ministry (http://earthministry.org/), take the “St. Francis Pledge to Care for Creation and the Poor” (from the Catholic Coalition on Climate Change, at http://www.catholicsandclimatechange.org/), or work through a “worship check-list” about the sustainability of its worship practices (at http://www.letallcreationpraise.org/liturgy/worship-checklist).  After all, what would motivate St. Routine to consider options like living flowers or plants in the sanctuary; beeswax candles rather than (oil-based) paraffin wax candles; local wine for communion; use of natural lighting, etc.?

Instead, the faithful file into a nicely air-conditioned hall after Mass, to enjoy coffee in styrofoam cups, before heading home in their cars.

The trouble with St. Routine of course is not that this community celebrates bad liturgies or that its faithful are bigger sinners than the rest of us.  The trouble is that the parish’s liturgical life routinely participates in non-sustainable practices that are by now widely known to further the threat of a catastrophic end to our planet earth.

And as Pope Francis tweeted on July 2:  “Stop ruining the garden which God has entrusted to us!”  Rather than only the fossil-fuel industry, maybe Francis also had St. Routine in mind?

My final comment: Don't get me wrong. I believe we should take care of our planet. I hate that in the south today when new homes are built, the land is clear-cut whereas in the past large trees were saved and added to the beauty and value of the property not to mention to help keep things cool and thus no need for the air conditioner blasting day and night.

I liked Lady Byrd Johnson's plan to keep America Beautiful and to improve the environment. We have accomplished much in the last 50 years or so and things are better than they were in the 1950's.

But I remember in my low flung ceiling church in Augusta prior to it being air conditioned, that in the summer  we got a taste of what hell was like!  Well, we did have giant fans, but these drowned out the priest, choir and even the silent prayers sent to God! And in the summer the priests were given dispensations to have either very short sermons or none at all so that the Mass could end early so hot it was!

Never mind the parishioners who fainted during Mass, a rather routine occurrence!

I refuse to feel guilty about air conditioning, but I will feel guilty about my parishioners having a heat stroke and dying because I felt guilty about a too cool church and turned the air conditioning off during the summer and opened the windows and just to please the pope. Talk about the heresy of ultramontanism!

And on top of that, Italians even if from South America, have a superstition about air conditioning and that cold air blowing on their neck will make the sick and die! I kid you not! I know!

YIKES, WE HAVE TO REMOVE OUR NEWLY INSTALLED ALTAR RAILING!

But don't panic over my sensational headline. I'm not being forced to do so by any liturgical terrorists in the diocese. We are a victim of circumstance and the altar railing will return as it is now.

LET ME EXPLAIN the sad, sad story!

Our altar railing was restored by having the first step to the sanctuary extended several feet so that the railing could be added with enough room on the nave side of the railing for people to kneel and enough room on the sanctuary side for the distribution of Holy Communion and for the restored gates to swing open properly without hitting the second step.

Herein lies the major, major problem. During construction, the floor extension was improperly installed. The joists below the two boards that support the new marble tiles are improperly spaced allowing too much give when the floor is walked upon causing numerous, and I mean numerous, hair line cracks in the new marble tiles behind the altar railing and for the entire length of the floor!!!!!

At first I couldn't believe what I was seeing with all these lines or cracks appearing. But our contractor removed some tiles to see what was going on and admitted that his subcontractor had botched the job! The entire length of the new step has to have all the tile removed, the joists properly spaced and new marble tiles reinstalled! I'm not sure if the altar railing will have to be removed or not. The marble under the kneeling pad and on which the altar railing itself rests is more solid and a single piece of marble (as opposed to marble tiles) and no cracks have appeared in it. So I am hoping the reconstruction of the joists can go under the railing rather than removing the railing and then reinstalling it. WHAT A MESS!

It will take several months for the new marble tiles to be fabricated and sent to us and a few weeks of dirty, dusty reconstruction. Just pray that the railing doesn't have to be removed and then reinstalled to shore up the mistake in construction!

The only positive note is that we don't have to pay a dime to correct the contractor's mistake!

THE ARROGANCE OF THE CURRENT PRESIDENT AND OF THE LIBERAL USA!

Sometimes I think I should return to my father's homeland and become a Canadian citizen or to my mother's homeland and become an Italian citizen. The only problem is that both of these countries are as much in free fall morally as any other nation in the world including the USA where I am proudly an American citizen.

Our current President along with the liberal politics of his party are quite arrogant and want to colonize the rest of the world with their ideologies! And thus we have the spectacle of a President of the United States, symbolically labeled the first gay president, chastising publicly the President of Kenya and the entire nation for their sexual morality as it concerns homosexuality and the nature of marriage.

On top of that, he chastises their culture's appreciation of women who stay at home and rear their children. Our President thinks that working women who have fewer children and make more money and have more possessions are the keys to progress. The President's mentality is what Pope Francis rails against in terms of Capitalism and the colonization of the world with ideologies that demean sexuality, women and legitimate progress and economic advancement.

I'm not saying that Kenya or any country doesn't have dark sides to their good cultural mores. However, I do know through my parochial vicar from Ghana that he and other Africans hate it when America tries to colonize Africa with American corrupt politics, sexuality and loose morals.

Oh, how I wish the President of Kenya had retorted to President Obama's arrogance by telling him to his face, "Mr. President, when you speak about the rights of the unborn and their right to be born and when you condemn Planned Parenthood and their macabre policies and practices and when you start going to Church every Sunday and experience Christian conversion, then maybe you will have some credibility in Kenya. But until then shut your damn, I'm sorry, I mean darn mouth!"

FUNERAL HOMILIES AND HOW TO COMFORT FAMILY AND FRIENDS WITHOUT CANONIZING THE FAITHFUL OR UNFAITHFUL DEPARTED

We have already explored how miserable our funeral Masses have become with all kinds of banalities and sentimentality abounding.

There are three areas where sentimentality and wishful thinking (a form of therapy for those who do it or plan it) take place:

1. First the Propers are tossed (which actually pray for the deceased) and sentimental hymns of schmaltzy quality, what is called "kitsch" are chosen.

2.  Eulogies given by family members or friends after Holy Communion that speak of everything that has no Catholic ethos whatsoever and might include non-Christian poems and secular songs.

3. Homilies that canonize the deceased although the goal is to comfort the grieving.

Bishops and priests must take back the Requiem Mass as designed by the Church, even in the Ordinary Form and reform some of the bad things allowed in the Ordinary Form Requiem such as the allowance of eulogies and the Propers being replaced by hymns of good or bad quality.

But what about priests and their homilies? How can the clergy stop from canonizing the faithful or unfaithful departed even with the benign goal of comforting the bereaved?

I have to admit sometimes I canonize people who I feel are in heaven, those who have gone to confession while they were dying, received the Sacrament of the Anointing of the Sick and the Apostolic Absolution and Holy Communion and were able to receive Viaticum moments before their last breath.

I say things like "grandma is reunited with her loved ones around the throne of God" and other such pious platitudes.

Of course even in the 1970's homiletic courses I had, we were warned not to give eulogies revolving around the life of the dead person or to canonize them but rather to preach the Paschal Mystery. We were to focus on Jesus Christ, especially His Passion, death and resurrection. How novel for funeral Liturgies, no?

But how can we clergy say something that will comfort the bereaved?

In the first place, we cannot omit Purgatory as though preaching about it and thinking that our loved one might be experiencing it would be insulting to the the deceased!

I will close with Father Longenecker's practical advice on the use of purgatory in funeral homilies and how to speak of the deceased in a loving way but without canonizing that person:

Belief in purgatory is both compassionate and common sense.

It is compassionate because it allows for a place for us to go to finish the work of becoming “perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect” It is compassionate because it takes human responsibility seriously and allows us to continue to co-operate with God’s grace for our soul’s purification.

Purgatory is common sense because all of us realize that very few of us are saints ready to enter directly into God’s presence, but also we know that (hopefully) not many of us are so desperately evil as to reject God forever and go to hell.

Therefore what do we say at funerals? We can be consistent with Catholic  beliefs and also be compassionate.

We can say, “Thank God for George’s life. What a terrific man he was. We’ll all miss him, and you can bet I will continue to pray that God will complete his work of grace in George’s life”

We can say, “Thank God for Jimmy. May God continue to lead him into his life, light and happiness.”

Purgatory is therefore a doctrine not only full of compassion and common sense, but also full of confidence, joy and eternal hope.

My final comment: Irish wakes are legendary. People have a good time prior to or after the Church's official Vigil for the Deceased (which might include the recitation of the Holy Rosary). It is at the wake after or before the priest or deacon (or in case of dire necessity, the pastoral minister) has executed the official Vigil for the Deceased that all kinds of things can be said about the deceased, seriously or in good humor, where songs of all kinds can be played or sung and people can raise a glass of cheer. Don't do any of this during the Vigil for the Deceased, at the Funeral Mass or Liturgy or at the Rite of Committal. At these liturgies simply read the black and do the red and do so scrupulously!

FATHER ALLAN J. MCDONALD WRITING ABOUT A WRECKOVATION IN 1981!

I had already chastised myself in a post from November 25, 2011 on the St. Teresa Church reckovation which I wrote about in an 1981 "Southern Cross" article (our diocesan  newspaper). I reprint it here! First from my blog post from November of 2011, I explain my thinking. But my actual diocesan newspaper article is below that and all the photos!  Enjoy:

A BLAST FROM THE PAST; A TIME WARP FROM THE 1980'S AND OH TO BE YOUNG AGAIN!

MY COMMENTS FIRST ON MY VERY OWN 1981 NEWSPAPER ARTICLE ON THE RENOVATION OF SAINT TERESA OF AVILA CHURCH IN ALBANY, GEORGIA (BE SURE TO SAY ALL-BENNY!)

Okay, this is going to be good! I was ordained on June 7, 1980. I went to major seminary in St. Mary's Seminary in Baltimore, Maryland, 1976-80. I was influenced greatly by the Sulpician school of liturgy and Father Eugene Walsh, SS both of which were very much influenced by the iconoclasm of the 1960's and 70's in the Church, the liturgy and the seminary!

 The pictures below I took with my blackberry from old photos I have and from the Southern Cross Diocesan newspaper which accounts for their poor quality. But you get the idea! My article was rather lengthy and I was surprised the editor of the Southern Cross published it in its entirety on November 19, 1981. I acted as the Master of Ceremonies for this consecration and a month later for another one at St. Joseph Church in Waycross, GA! This combined with the article eventually led Bishop Lessard to name me the Associate Pastor of the Cathedral in 1985 as well as Diocesan Master of Ceremonies and Director of Liturgy.

While the article below and the pictures from 1981 depict my thinking very well and much, I would write today more from the hermeneutic of reform within continuity rather than reform within rupture with the past! Please note, though, and this doesn't shock me, that no where in the article do I discuss the Sacrificial aspect of the Mass--it is the Lord's Supper and our sharing in it! It's all about the banquet, not about the bloody sacrifice re-presented in an "unbloodly way." Nor is there any description of the Holy Eucharist as the "Body, Blood, Soul and Divinity of Christ." That was so pre-Vatican II in the 1980's! It is to laugh today! What a time warp!

I had a great deal of influence on this renovation and pushed it mightily through and tried to convince reticent parishioners to get with it! But the one good thing I did do was to convince the renovation committee not to follow Rambusch's demand that the large crucifix on the wall above the altar be removed. I save Jesus crucified! (another example of how the sacrifice of Christ was not emphasized in the post-Vatican II, spirit of Vatican II theology that Rambusch and other church renovators shoved down the throat of the Church in America.

After this Mass was over, many parishioners came up to me and said the altar is too low, we couldn't see a thing! Rambusch only wanted it all to be two steps high so that it wasn't distant and aloof from the congregation! Within a couple of months I regretted this "reckovation!" About ten years ago, this sanctuary was again renovated (restored) and statues placed back where they once had been rather than hidden off to the sides. Everything that goes around comes around again! Enjoy my time warp article below! I'd love to read your comments! But be nice, I was a young whippersnapper!
My article on the front page of our Diocesan newspaper "The Southern Cross" from November 19, 1981!

This photo from the paper of the "before" pre-Vatican II design:

The renovation in progress after the deconstruction:

Bishop Raymond W. Lessard incensing the new altar:

Choir leaders and choir singing from new location next to the altar, please note where the choir director had to stand!

Bishop Lessard celebrating "The Lord's Supper" as it was described in 1981 for the first time on the newly consecrated altar. Please note my modern chalice (my parents gave it to me for my ordination gift) and the baskets of bread in real baskets with napkins below the bread to be consecrated, real food and drink and not to be missed! Please note too the large crystal decanter of wine being consecrated to later be "poured out" into additional "cups" as a sign of Christ's Blood poured out for us!

One of the first school Masses in the renovated Church:

On Saturday afternoon, October 31, (1981) Bishop Raymond W. Lessard dedicated the newly renovated sanctuary of St. Teresa’s Church in Albany (GA). The rites of the solemn ceremony included the sprinkling with water and anointed with chrism of the new altar as well as its incensation. This ritual corresponds to the rites of initiation of Christians through the sacraments of baptism and confirmation. Just as we are initiated by the waters of baptism, and anointed with the gift of the Holy Spirit for membership and service in the Assembly of God’s people, so to is the altar sprinkled and anointed for service in the midst of God’s people as we celebrate the presence of the risen Christ among us.

When Saint Teresa’s Church building was first dedicated in 1958 by then Bishop Thomas J. McDonough, its worship space was designed to accommodate an understanding of the church liturgy which was primarily the responsibility of the priest assisted by altar boys. The laity passively participated as spectators to what occurred beyond the barrier of the altar railing between the priest and God.

The universal changes promulgated by the Second Vatican Council touched the local churches throughout the world. Saint Teresa’s in Albany began to experience what this renewal meant as the concrete changes began to touch them in the most dramatic way in the mid 1960’s. As the years progressed, the leadership of St. Teresa’s began to realize the broader implications of the symbolic changes in church liturgy. The 1958 design of the church’s worshiping space neither captured nor symbolized the new role of the laity in the total life of the church and its worship. Under the pastorate of Fr. Herbert J. Wellmeier and the parish council, a committee was chosen in the summer of 1980 to come up with a new plan for St. Teresa’s sanctuary. The architectural firm of Rambusch of New York was hired as design consultants for the renovation committee. They are noted specialists in church renovation.

The design concept of the newly renovated sanctuary incorporates the most recent theological thinking on how best to symbolize the presence of Christ in and with the worshiping assembly. We worship God the Father through the presence of His Son Jesus. His presence calls us to actively participate in His life which should touch every aspect of our lives.

The seating around the altar and ambo (pulpit) is arranged in a manner that draws the assembly into the actions of worship. The assembly becomes aware of Christ in and with the gathered community, “Where two or three meet in my name, I shall be there with them.” (Matthew 18:20) The presence of Christ here must be acknowledged and reverenced. The arrangement of chairs allows faces to be seen rather than just the backs of people’s heads. We do not worship privately, but corporately with others.

The assembly gathers around the one table of God’s Word, the ambo, to be nourished by the presence of Christ in the proclaimed Scriptures. “In the beginning was the Word: The Word was with God and the Word was God…The Word was made Flesh, He lived among us…: (John 1:1-14) The presence of Christ here must be acknowledge and reverenced.

Likewise, the assembly gathers around the one table of the Lord’s Supper—the altar. A multiplicity of altars lessens the significance of the one table which is a sign of Christ who is the source of our unity. As a unified assembly aware of our communion with the entire church, we are nourished by the body and blood of our Lord who is present through the signs and actions of blessing bread and wine, and communally eating and drinking the Lord’s Supper-the sacrament of the Holy Eucharist. The presence of Christ here must be acknowledged and reverenced.

The altar, ambo and celebrant’s chair are centrally located in the worship space of the Church. These furnishings extend far into the assembly eliciting participation and symbolizing the intimacy of Christ with His people—the Church. Statuary and other art work are placed in locations other than the sanctuary so that at Mass the focus of attention is on the various actions of the celebration not on various devotions.

To the left of the ambo and altar is the large baptismal pool. Baptism incorporates the Christian into the assembly of believers. It initiates the Christian into the life, death and resurrection of Jesus. The baptismal pool with its life-giving water is a powerful symbol of our Christian dignity and responsibility as a priestly people.
To the right of the ambo and altar is the organ and place for the choir. The choir as part of the gathered worshiping assembly does not entertain, but leads the community in singing and actively participating in the worship of the heavenly Father. The move from the choir loft to the side of the sanctuary highlights the ministry of leadership of the choir.

To the rear of the altar and ambo is a beautifully crafted decorative screen. Behind this screen is a devotional area which accommodates eight to ten people. This is where the Holy Eucharist is reserved in the tabernacle for those who are sick and shut-in and for private prayer and meditation. A hanging sanctuary lamp above the screen signifies the presence of the Eucharist I the tabernacle.

The total perspective of the renovated sanctuary immediately encourages the gathered worshipers to focus in upon the faith realities of the presence of Christ in His community, in His Word and in His Supper. St. Teresa’s sanctuary is a model of what other churches in the diocese can do with their pre-Vatican II sanctuary designs.