THE WAR ON THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BECOMES GLOBAL, IT IS A WORLD WAR AGAINST THE CATHOLIC CHURCH BY WORLD GOVERNMENTS!

Folks, the United Nations today just declared war on the Catholic Church! 

Of course the Vatican already knew this, but I suspect they understand the war being waged against the Catholic Church by secularists in politics to be even more grave than thought.

We can thank the United Nations for articulating the Global War on the Catholic Church by those country-members of the United Nations

Here is a brief snippet from AP (You can read the entire story by pressing here):

VATICAN CITY (AP) — The Vatican "systematically" adopted policies that allowed priests to rape and molest tens of thousands of children over decades, a U.N. human rights committee said Wednesday, urging the Holy See to open its files on pedophiles and bishops who concealed their crimes.

In a devastating report hailed by abuse victims, the U.N. committee severely criticized the Holy See for its attitudes toward homosexuality, contraception and abortion and said it should change its own canon law to ensure children's rights and their access to health care are guaranteed.

 

 The Vatican promptly objected and its U.N. ambassador accused the committee of having betrayed the international body's own objectives by allowing itself to be swayed by pro-gay ideologues. He said it appeared the committee simply hadn't listened when the Holy See outlined all the measures it has taken to protect children.

 

 The committee, for example, urged the Vatican to amend its canon law to identify circumstances where access to abortion can be permitted for children, such as to save the life of a young mother. It urged the Holy See to ensure that sex education, including access to information about contraception and preventing HIV, is mandatory in Catholic schools. It called for the Holy See to use its moral authority to condemn discrimination against homosexual children, or children raised by same-sex couples.

Church teaching holds that life begins at conception. The Vatican, which therefore opposes abortion and artificial contraception, calls for respect for gays, but considers homosexual acts to be "intrinsically disordered." The Vatican has a history of diplomatic confrontation with the United Nations over such issues.

Archbishop Silvano Tomasi said the call to reconsider abortion ran against the U.N. treaty's own objectives to protect the life of children before and after birth, and he accused pro-gay rights and gay marriage advocacy groups of having "reinforced an ideological line" with the committee.

Here is Archbishop Tomasi's full comment on the Vatican website:

(Vatican Radio) The United Nations has issued concluding observations on the reviewed reports of the Holy See and five States , Parties to the Convention on the Rights of the Child. It follows a hearing at the UN in Geneva attended by a group from Holy See last month. Heading the Vatican delegation at those discussions was Archbishop Silvano Tomasi, Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the United Nations in Geneva.

He gave his reaction to the report to Vatican Radio.

Q. What is the reaction of the Holy See to these harsh criticisms by the UN contained in this report?

The report in the concluding recommendations that the committee of the Convention on the Right of the Child that were released today point out a rather negative approach to what the Holy See has been doing and has already achieved in the area of the protection of children. The first impression is that the report in some ways is not up to date, not taking into account some of the clear and precise explanations that were given to the committee in the in the encounter that the delegation of the Holy See had with the committee three or four weeks ago. Second, I would say that there is a difficultly apparent in understanding the position of the Holy See that cannot certainly give up certain teachings that are part of their deep convictions and also an expression of freedom of religion and these are the values that in the tradition of the Catholic Church sustain the common good of society and therefore cannot be renounced, for example the committee asked for acceptance of abortion and this is a contradiction with the principle of life that the convention itself should support recommending that children be protected before and after birth. If a child is eliminated or killed we can no longer talk about rights for this person, so there is a need to calmly and in detail analyzing the recommendations proposed by the committee and provide an accurate response to the committee itself, so that there will be no misunderstanding on where we stand and the reason why we take certain positions and I would add that the practical remedies for preventing cases of abuse of children in forms of laws or decisions of Episcopal Conferences of directives for the formation of seminarians constitute a package of measures that is very difficult, I think, to find other institutions or even other states that have done so much specifically for the protection of children. So, my sense is that we have to continue to refine, to enact provisions that protect children in all their necessities so that they may grow and become productive adults in society and their dignity be constantly respected. And at the same time we have to keep in mind that even though there are so many millions, forty million cases of abuse a year regarding children and unfortunately some cases affect also Church personnel. We have to keep in mind that, we have to continue to combat this tragedy knowing that even a case of abuse of a child is a case too much.


Q. The United Nations had said that the Holy See had responded better than other countries regarding the safeguarding of children. What’s changed now?
A. The Holy See presented its report as a state like in this 65th session of the activity of the committee. The reports of Germany, the Holy See, Congo, Portugal, Russian Federation and Yemen were examined. The Holy See presented the concrete measures taken both at the level of the State of Vatican City and of the Church at large, taking into account that priests are not employees of the Pope but they are responsible citizens of the countries where they work and therefore accountable to the judicial system of those countries. The effort made was to give an objective picture of the remedies undertaken of the new steps that still are in the making like the commission announced by the Holy Father for the protection of minors and without any comparison with other states we simply say we recognize there has been a small percentage of Church personnel that have committed abuses and these are the steps taken to prevent that such abuses be made again. Maybe not all the observations in the facts have been adequately taken into account in the conclusions, so that for example the principle that the Holy See is accountable directly for the Vatican City State but not for other countries where local jurisdiction in the state authorities a responsibility and should implement and punish whoever including priests may have abused children, so that’s possibly an explanation but we need time to reflect carefully on the conclusions and recommendations of the committee and to prepare an adequate response, so that the objective may really be pursued. The Holy See is a state party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child and intends to be faithfully carrying out all the elements of this Convention for the protection of children and this is the way toward the future and I don’t think that there will be fundamental changes in this task ahead.


Text from page http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/02/05/archbishop_tomasi_reacts_to_un_report_observations/en1-770552
of the Vatican Radio website

THIS IS A COOL VIDEO ON A COOL SCHOOL IN A CERTAIN MACON, GEORGIA PARISH

THE MASS IS MORE THAN A MEAL! POPE FRANCIS, FEBRUARY 5, 2014

(Vatican Radio) Pope Francis was greeted by a sea of people taking cover under umbrellas as he made his way into St Peter’s Square on Wednesday for his weekly General Audience. Making reference to the rainy weather the Pope said “it’s not a nice day is it”.
In his continuing Catechesis on the Sacraments, the Holy Father focused his attention on the Eucharist saying that it accompanies us every step of the way on our pilgrimage of faith.

Reflecting on the Mass, Pope Francis said it was a banquet that nourishes us not only with the bread of life but also with the proclamation of God’s word in the Scriptures.

The Pope went on to say that at the Last Supper, Christ gave us this sacrament when he broke bread and offered the cup as the foreshadowing of his sacrifice on the Cross. In this Eucharistic sacrifice, he added, Jesus gave us the supreme prayer of thanksgiving to God our merciful Father. 

The Holy Father underlined that the celebration of the Eucharist is more than simply a banquet; it is he said a memorial of the Lord’s passion, death and resurrection, and makes present the paschal mystery in all its saving power. 

Departing from his prepared remarks Pope Francis stressed that we can never thank the Lord enough for the gift of the Eucharist adding, "that is why it is so important to go to Mass on Sundays, to go to Mass, not only to pray, but to receive Communion, the bread which is the Body of Jesus Christ, that saves us, forgives us, and unites us with the Father." 

Listen to Lydia O'Kane's report

WITH CHANGING FORTUNES, FROM APPEARANCE SAKE, IS CARDINAL BURKE'S LITURGICAL VISION OUT OF DATE OR AHEAD OF ITS TIME?

Money Quote from Cardinal Burke: The reform that was done, the reform of the rites, went beyond and in some senses perhaps not completely coherently, with what the Council Fathers had set forth. We need to go back and to…not negate everything that happened, and it’s not that everything that happened at the Council was bad and wrong. But we need to correct the abuses that entered in and so forth. I have the hope that some of those elements, for instance, that were taken away will be reincorporated again, so it will be more evident, the organic unity of the two forms of the same rite.

When you listen to Cardinal Burke in this 2012 interview, it sounds to me that he would have been very much involved in what the Anglican Use Mass has recovered in its Appendix to it new Roman Missal as Cardinal Burke was and still is a member of the Congregation for Divine Worship. So what he speaks must have been spoken in those meetings and certainly in the recent revision of the Anglican Use Mass which had to be approved by the new Holy Father, Pope Francis.

These are the things in the Anglican Use Liturgy that show the organic unity between the Extraordinary Form Mass and the Ordinary Form Mass and one can see here, in a clairvoyant way, what is in store for the rest of the Latin Rite Church's Ordinary Form Mass in a future minor revision of the Missal, with the following allowed but found in the Appendix (similar to the additional Penitential Acts with Form C that are in the Appendix currently).

I. The Prayers at the Foot of the Altar

II. Revised Order of the Introductory Rite when using the PATFOTA

III. EF's Offertory Prayers

IV. EF's Rubrics for the Roman Canon

V. The Last Gospel

We already know that Latin and Gregorian Chant are to have a place of pride in the Ordinary Form. That has been allowed since the Council and encouraged by Pope Benedict in one of the most formal ways he could:

And from   (Sacramentum Caritatis, n. 62) above, the most authoritative directive about the use of Liturgical Latin from the Holy Father, the Bishop of Rome:

The Latin language

62. None of the above observations should cast doubt upon the importance of such large-scale liturgies. I am thinking here particularly of celebrations at international gatherings, which nowadays are held with greater frequency. The most should be made of these occasions. In order to express more clearly the unity and universality of the Church, I wish to endorse the proposal made by the Synod of Bishops, in harmony with the directives of the Second Vatican Council, (182) that, with the exception of the readings, the homily and the prayer of the faithful, it is fitting that such liturgies be celebrated in Latin. Similarly, the better-known prayers (183) of the Church's tradition should be recited in Latin and, if possible, selections of Gregorian chant should be sung. 

Speaking more generally, I ask that future priests, from their time in the seminary, receive the preparation needed to understand and to celebrate Mass in Latin, and also to use Latin texts and execute Gregorian chant; nor should we forget that the faithful can be taught to recite the more common prayers in Latin, and also to sing parts of the liturgy to Gregorian chant. (184)

COPING WITH CHANGE, IT APPLIES TO EVERYONE AS IT CONCERNS THE LITURGY IN THE 21ST CENTURY

At two other liturgical blogs there is a great debate going on between two liturgists of different perspectives, each claiming infallibility at it concerns the current day liturgical landscape.

The progressive thinks that the reformed Mass of Pope Paul VI is far superior to the Mass celebrated during Vatican II and before.

The traditionalist thinks that the Mass celebrated during Vatican II and before is the better format for the Mass.

I won't go into the details because some of it is like trying to count the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin.

Let me just say that the major principles of Vatican II's Sacrosanctum Concilium and to a certain extent the other documents of Vatican II apply to the whole Church and the liturgy in terms of whatever form is chosen.

That's the change all of us must accept. Today the Church in the Latin Rite has up to three variations from official policy. The Ordinary Form, the Extraordinary Form and the Anglican Use. Get use to it!

The theology that the Church, Head and members gathers for the liturgy applies to all the liturgies there are in the Church both east and west. That's the way it is. That's our ecclesiology, each doing what is prescribe for each in the liturgy, bishop, priest, deacon, acolyte, lector, choir member, laity.

All liturgies of the Church are communal, bar none!

All liturgies of the Church make visible the Church (Militant, Suffering and Triumphant) in the various visible gatherings of the Church wherever that gathering is!

All Liturgies of the Church contain the Word of God, some have more, some have less. The EF has more, the OF has a broader lectionary but less Scripture per Mass than the EF!

BOTTOM LINE: The Holy Sacrifice of the Mass make present in an unbloody, sacramental way, the Passion of Our Lord, broadly understood as the Paschal Mystery. And the Sacrificial Banquet is shared in the Rite of Holy Communion in the worthy reception of the Body and Blood of the Lord at the Priest's communion and the Communion of the laity.

Full, conscious and actual participation is required in all forms of the liturgy, the three official ones now in the Latin Rite and of course in all the different forms of the Divine Liturgy in the East. This is required no matter the language used, with Latin preeminent common, neutral sacral language in the Latin Rite.

All liturgies when prayed as prescribed, with attention to detail, art, movement, beauty and with scrupulous attention to the full, conscious and active participation of the both the clergy and laity are equal in majesty, doctrine, dogma, ecclesiology and finally the most important, the salvation of souls!

We have many forms on the one Latin Rite and more forms in the Eastern Rite! Get use to it and get over it!

THE VIRGIN BIRTH OF JESUS (NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH HIS VIRGIN CONCEPTION OR BLESSED VIRGIN MARY'S IMMACULATE CONCEPTION)

MONEY QUOTE:

Witness also St. Augustine’s faith in the miraculous quality of the virgin birth: ‘That same power which brought the body of the risen Jesus through closed doors brought the body of the Infant forth from the inviolated womb of the Mother.’

There is some confusion about our Blessed Mother and her need to be purified in the temple some weeks after the Virgin Birth of Jesus.  I contend she did not truly need to be purified in the "Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary" and that Jesus did not need the offerings of the poor offered in the temple to "redeem Jesus" in the Presentation of Jesus in the Temple. This would be in line with Jesus' not needing John's Baptism of repentance in the River Jordan, as Jesus as God and Man committed no actual sin nor had any hint of Original Sin.

So what is the Church's teaching on the Virgin Birth? Here's a pretty good synopsis:

The essential truth of the Virgin Birth, as taught continually by the Fathers and defined by the Church, does not concern the presence or absence of pain during Jesus’ birth. The central truth of the Virgin Birth is that Christ was born of Mary miraculously, as a sign and confirmation of His divinity. The Virgin Birth has always been distinguished from the Virginal Conception, because it was a separate and distinct miraculous event. It was not a natural birth, nor is it explainable by natural causes. Our Lady’s physical virginity, with all that it implies, remained integral and intact before, during, and after the birth of Jesus. St. Bernard, St. Thomas Aquinas, St. Bonaventure, and the Catechism of the Council of Trent all teach the painlessness of the birth as a logical consequence of its miraculous nature."

In a video posted on the website of the Franciscan Fathers of the Immaculate, Fr. Geiger explains:

"The perpetual virginity of Our Lady is a dogma of the Church, part of the deposit of the Faith, from which no Catholic may dissent. The Church has always defined the dogma of Our Lady’s perpetual virginity as Her virginity before, during, and after the birth of Jesus.

"The virginity of Mary before the birth of Jesus refers to the fact that Jesus was conceived in the womb of Mary, flesh of Her flesh, by the power of the Holy Spirit, without a father. Virtually all Christians, Catholics and Protestants, hold this position.

"To speak to you about the Virgin Birth, of the virginity of Our Lady during the birth of Jesus. This is an essential part of the Church’s definition of Our Lady’s perpetual virginity. This truth is based on Sciptures; in Isaiah 7:14 we read: ‘Therefore the Lord Himself shall give you a sign; behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and His name shall be called Emmanuel.’

"St. Thomas Aquinas writes in the Summa Theologica that this verse teaches both the virginal conception and the virgin birth of Jesus from Our Lady: "A virgin shall conceive AND bear a son…" Both the conception and the birth are miraculous, with no natural explanation.

"The Fathers and the medieval theologians continually used the analogy of light passing through glass: just as light passes through glass without breaking it, so Our Lord is born of the Virgin Mary without breaking the seal of Her virginity.

"The definition of the Lateran Council in 649 A.D. states that, in addition to conceiving Jesus without the seed of man, that She gives birth to Him ‘without any detriment to Her virginity.’ The Council of course goes on to say that Her virginity "remained inviolable even after His birth."

"Less than fifty years later, at the Council of Toledo, in 693, the Church teaches the doctrine very clearly: ‘And, as the Virgin acquired the modesty of virginity before conception, so also She experienced no loss of Her integrity, for She conceived a virgin, gave birth a virgin, and after birth retained the uninterrupted modesty of an intact virgin.’ This obvious sense of this definition indicates that we are speaking of physical virginity.

"The Fathers of the Church are careful to treat this mystery with reverence and prudential mortification of the tongue. Never do they speak about the physiology of the virginity in regard to Our Lady because, after all, She is the mother of God, and not a scientific case study… Notice the delicacy of St. Ambrose in the 4^th century: ‘Mary is the gate through which Christ entered the world when He was brought forth in the virginal birth, and the matter of his birth did not break the seal of virginity.’

Witness also St. Augustine’s faith in the miraculous quality of the virgin birth: ‘That same power which brought the body of the risen Jesus through closed doors brought the body of the Infant forth from the inviolated womb of the Mother.’

"St. Gregory the Great, in the 7^th century, makes it clear that the virgin birth is a miracle only comparable to the Resurrection, and one in the face of which reason must give way to faith.

"Finally, all this seems to be fairly simple if we understand that the virgin birth is not a natural but a miraculous birth, matched only by the escape of Jesus from a sealed tomb… The Fathers of the Church tell us, interpretating Isaiah (7:14), that if a virgin conceives and bears a son, that son must be God. The miraculous physical virginity of Our Lady is the fundamental guarantee of the divinity of Christ."

In the recent Catechism of the Catholic Church, published in 1992, we read: "The deepening of faith in the virginal motherhood led the Church to confess Mary’s real and perpetual virginity even in the act of giving birth to the Son of God made man. In fact, Christ’s birth «did not diminish his mother’s virginal integrity but sanctified it.» And so the liturgy of the Church celebrates Mary as Aeiparthenos, the ‘Ever-virgin’." (Paragraph 499.)

Pope John Paul II reaffirmed this dogma in an address to a Marian Study Conference in Capua, Italy, on June 10, 1992 teaching that: "The Church, in confessing her faith in the Mother of God’s virginity, proclaims as factually true that Mary: a) truly conceived Jesus by the Holy Spirit without human intervention; b) truly and virginally gave birth to her Son; c) remained a virgin after His birth in everything that concerns the integrity of the flesh.  She lived in total and perpetual virginity after Jesus’ birth.  Together with St. Joseph, who was also called to play a primary role in the initial events of our salvation, she devoted herself to serving the Person and work of her Son." 

ON THE USE OF LATIN FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SOVERIGN PONTIFF

THE OFFICE OF THE LITURGICAL CELEBRATIONS
OF THE SOVEREIGN PONTIFF  

THE USE OF THE LATIN LANGUAGE

Undoubtedly, Latin is the language that has the most longevity in the Roman Liturgy: It has been in use for over sixteen centuries, that is to say, from the time when the official liturgical language of the Church went from Greek to Latin – a change completed under Pope Damasus (+384). The official liturgical books of the Roman Rite are still published in Latin today (editio typica).
The Code of Canon Law (canon 928) stipulates: “The eucharistic celebration is to be carried out in the Latin language or in another language provided that the liturgical texts have been legitimately approved.” Taking into consideration the present situation, this canon translates in a concise manner the teaching of the Constitution of the Sacred Liturgy of the Second Vatican Council.
The well-known number 36 of Sacrosanctum Concilium established the following principle:

“Particular law remaining in force, the use of the Latin language is to be preserved in the Latin rites”(§ 1).

In this sense, the Code affirms first of all: “The eucharistic celebration is to be carried out in the Latin language.”
In the sections which follow, Sacrosanctum Concilium admits of the possibility of using also the vernacular languages:

“But since the use of the mother tongue, whether in the Mass, the administration of the sacraments, or other parts of the liturgy, frequently may be of great advantage to the people, the limits of its employment may be extended. This will apply in the first place to the readings and directives, and to some of the prayers and chants, according to the regulations on this matter to be laid down separately in subsequent chapters. (§ 2)
“These norms being observed, it is for the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned in Art. 22, 2, to decide whether, and to what extent, the vernacular language is to be used; their decrees are to be approved, that is, confirmed, by the Apostolic See. And, whenever it seems to be called for, this authority is to consult with bishops of neighboring regions which have the same language. (§ 3)
“Translations from the Latin text into the mother tongue intended for use in the liturgy must be approved by the competent territorial ecclesiastical authority mentioned above.” (§ 4)

On the basis of those subsequent sections, the Code adds: “or in another language provided that the liturgical texts have been legitimately approved.”
As can be seen, likewise according to present norms, the Latin language still holds primacy of place as that language which, based on principle, the Church prefers, even though she recognizes that the vernacular can be useful for the faithful. In the present concrete situation, liturgical celebrations in Latin have become rather rare. Hence, a motivation for using Latin is because in the Papal Liturgy (but not only in the Papal Liturgy), Latin should be safeguarded as a precious inheritance of the Western liturgical tradition. Not by chance did the Servant of God, John Paul II recall that:

“The Roman Church has special obligations towards Latin, the splendid language of ancient Rome, and she must manifest them whenever the occasion presents itself” (Dominicae cenae, n. 10).

In continuity with the Magisterium of his Predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, besides wishing that there would be a greater use of the traditional Latin language in liturgical celebrations, especially during international gatherings, wrote:

“Speaking more generally, I ask that future priests, from their time in the seminary, receive the preparation needed to understand and to celebrate Mass in Latin, and also to use Latin texts and execute Gregorian chant; nor should we forget that the faithful can be taught to recite the more common prayers in Latin, and also to sing parts of the liturgy to Gregorian chant” (Sacramentum Caritatis, n. 62).

And from   (Sacramentum Caritatis, n. 62) above, the most authoritative directive about the use of Liturgical Latin from the Holy Father, the Bishop of Rome:

The Latin language

62. None of the above observations should cast doubt upon the importance of such large-scale liturgies. I am thinking here particularly of celebrations at international gatherings, which nowadays are held with greater frequency. The most should be made of these occasions. In order to express more clearly the unity and universality of the Church, I wish to endorse the proposal made by the Synod of Bishops, in harmony with the directives of the Second Vatican Council, (182) that, with the exception of the readings, the homily and the prayer of the faithful, it is fitting that such liturgies be celebrated in Latin. Similarly, the better-known prayers (183) of the Church's tradition should be recited in Latin and, if possible, selections of Gregorian chant should be sung. Speaking more generally, I ask that future priests, from their time in the seminary, receive the preparation needed to understand and to celebrate Mass in Latin, and also to use Latin texts and execute Gregorian chant; nor should we forget that the faithful can be taught to recite the more common prayers in Latin, and also to sing parts of the liturgy to Gregorian chant. (184)

DUH! WHY DOESN'T THE CHURCH USE A COMMON LANGUAGE FOR THE MASS TO UNITE US CATHOLICS OF DIFFERENT LANGUAGES WHEN WE ATTEND MASS TOGETHER? WHY HASN'T THIS BEEN THOUGHT OF BEFORE NOW?

I can't find the embedded code again, for some odd reason, but to play the French Canadian pre-1962 Roman Missal Mass filmed in a television studio in 1960, with excellent chant-like actual participation, both interior and exterior, of the congregation press HERE.

My Comment: As I watched this video again, and hearing the brief voice over of the commentator speaking in French, it reminded me why Latin should return to being the universal language of the Church. It unites people of various tongues and races during worship

Now that I am celebrating the Latin Mass every Tuesday and once a month on the First Sunday, I know all of those Latin Prayers almost by heart and understand them in Latin, not by translating them in my mind into English. Most pre-Vatican II Catholics at the time could witness to my same experience today in terms of actually comprehending the Latin for the fixed parts of the Mass, which was the majority of the EF Mass, except for the Antiphons, Collects, Secrets and Post Communion Prayers and prefaces. For the changing parts, we relied on our trusty English Missals!

So as I listened to this 1960 video, it wasn't foreign to me although the congregation was a French speaking one! I was united to them in the Mass because it was in Latin. I was one with them. I didn't need to hear it in English and the French speakers didn't need it in French. We were one!

As some of you may know, there has been political conflict and animosity in Canada due to the cultural and language differences between English Canada and French Canada. There has also been a separatist movement.  

But listening to these French Canadians celebrate the Mass in Latin, albeit with a bit of a French accent, tells me that anyone in the world at that time could have joined them and no one would have been jealous that their language wasn't used or incorporated somehow into a hodgepodge of languages so common today at Mass in so many places in the USA and other places. 

The same "separatist" movement could occur here in the USA with Spanish speaking and English speaking people.  There is great division today in Anglo parishes where Spanish speakers have moved in and sometimes overwhelm the original majority. The Mass itself becomes the battleground. Either an all Spanish Mass replaces an English Mass or there is this horrible hybrid Mass of both languages that irritates everyone.

I have a great idea! Why not celebrate the Mass in Latin and let the various language groups learn how to participate in this common liturgical language and use a translation of the Latin into their own Language in missals they purchase for themselves.

I think this is a great idea. I wonder why someone hasn't thought of it before me! 

AFTER BLIZZARDMONIUM AND SNOWSTERIA, NOT TO MENTION ICEPOCALYPSE, IT IS 75 DEGREES THIS SUNDAY AFTERNOON AND SUNNY IN MACON, GEORGIA! I WONDER IF THERE WILL BE SCHOOL TOMORROW!

IT IS HOTLICIOUS AND PANDEMONIUSLYSWELTERING THIS HOTTACULAR SUNNY SUNDAY AFTERNOON! PLEASE NO SCHOOL TOMORROW! IT'S JUST TOO HOTPOCALPSE!

THE HOLY FATHER CELEBRATES MASS FOR THE FEAST OF THE PRESENTATION OF THE LORD AND CANDLEMAS

The Holy Father uses the cope for the Candlemas part of this Feast celebrated in the great narthex of St. Peter's.  Then the pope changes from the ornate cope to a new ornate chasable, quite beautiful and stunning in its noble simplicity, the kind of vestments I like! The proper chants are chanted and the Kyrie is not omitted! His Holiness Mass is almost as nice as ours at St. Joseph Church, which had all the proper chants too!

PLEASE NOTE THE STUNNING PRE-VATICAN II ALTAR ARRANGEMENT THAT THE HOLY FATHER HAS MAINTAINED TO MODEL TO THE WORLD! ALSO, PLEASE NOTE, THE AD ORIENTEM WAY THE POPE DELICATELY MODELS THE PRAYERS OF THE CHURCH, NOT IN A DRAMATIC, ACTING VOICE, BUT IN A QUIET, SOOTHING PRAYING VOICE EVEN WHEN FACING THE CONGREGATION!

YES HOLY FATHER, WE CAN IMAGINE OUR SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS WITHOUT NUNS, IT IS A REALITY!

MY COMMENTS FIRST: In the Diocese of Savannah and I suspect elsewhere, there are no sisters teaching in the majority of our schools and in my parish school. At one time in Macon there were upwards to 40 until about the mid to late 1960's Sisters of Mercy to staff our school and their private academy, Mt. de Sales. Today both schools are completely lay run. The same scenario plays out in other schools. And the Catholic hospital in Augusta owned and operated by the Sisters of Saint Joseph of Corondelet sold the hospital to a for profit corporation. There are no more Sisters of St. Joseph in Augusta, where once up until the mid 1960's there were close to 50.

Pope Francis: a Church without nuns is “un-imaginable”! (Vatican Radio) Pope Francis on Sunday highlighted the great value that nuns bring to the Church. “What would happen” – the Pope said – “if there were no nuns? No nuns in hospitals, in missions, in charitable institutions, in schools… Can you even imagine a Church without nuns…? No it is unthinkable!”. And speaking on the day in which we celebrate the World Day for Consecrated Life, the Pope said that nuns are great women. He said “they are a gift, the leaven that carries the message of Christ”. “These women – he said – are great!” The Pope’s words came before the Sunday recitation of the Angelus in St Peter’s Square, after having presided over Mass in the Basilica on the Feast Day of the Presentation of Jesus at the Temple, a Feast which is traditionally dedicated to Consecrated Life. To those gathered in the Square Pope Francis said that consecrated persons in different sectors are “the leaven of a more just and fraternal society”. He said that “Consecrated Life is a gift of God to the Church and to His people”. The Pope said that the Church and the world needs the witness of religious and consecrated lay people to the love and the mercy of God, and he asked for prayers so that many young people may say “yes” to God who calls them “to consecrate their lives to Him and to be of service to their brothers and sisters”. Pope Francis recalled that the year 2015 will be dedicated to Consecrated Life and asked for prayers for this initiative. After the recitation of the Angelus Prayer, Pope Francis reminded those present that in Italy “The Day for Life” is celebrated today with the theme “Generating the Future”. He sent his greetings and encouragement to those committed to the defence of life from its conception to its natural end.

Text from page http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2014/02/02/pope_francis:_a_church_without_nuns_is_%E2%80%9Cun-imaginable%E2%80%9D!/en1-769569
of the Vatican Radio website

PRIOR TO VATICAN II THE PRE-1962 ROMAN MISSAL CELEBRATED TOWARD THE PEOPLE WITH FULL, CONSCIOUS AND ACTUAL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR PARTICIPATION

At the bottom of this post is the first part of a pre-1962 Roman Missal Mass filmed in a television studio in French Canada in 1960. I would have been almost 7 years old at the time. The Mass is toward to the congregation and celebrated by a bishop. It is a Low Mass with the complete Church present in her ecclesiology, that of the Bishop, priests and laity and most importantly the One who gathers them, Almighty God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit each doing what is prescribed of them for the celebration of Holy Mass. There is no difference in this "Introductory Rite" with the extended Prayers at the Foot of the Altar with the laity's responses as compared to the Revised Mass and its much briefer introductory Rite.

There are those to the middle of the left who are dogmatic about what Vatican II intended and didn't and this ideological group is the most dogmatic about non infallible instructions on the revision of the Mass that would lead to more communal interaction and participation of the clergy and laity at Mass. These left to the middle Catholics would seem to think in the most wrong-headed way possible that this form of the Mass revised a bit in 1962's Roman Missal was outlawed by Vatican II and confirmed as being abrogated once and for all for all of eternity by Pope Paul VI because he was following the dogmatism of an infallible Council as it concerns the revision of the Mass and a new discovery, that the Mass is to be communal, as though the pre-1962 Roman Missal couldn't be and wasn't because of its intrinsically flawed ecclesiology as though ecclesiology could be defined in the post-Vatican II Church as a completely different doctrine compared to the pre-Vatican II Church. Talk about rupture in continuity in a flawed theology and way of thinking of those left of the center in the Church.

A Benedictine priest at another blog's comment section, who should know better, makes the most dogmatic statement I have ever read about what the Council Father's desired for the Mass and how they denigrated the Mass that was celebrated at Vatican II to do so. I find this statement incredulous but here goes:

"The old rite, no matter how emotionally people are invested in it, no matter how closely they follow it during its celebration, does not express the nature of the Church according to the fathers of Vatican II. Clericalized sacred drama, no matter how prayerfully one prays along with it, is not what the fathers of Vatican II wanted. (There were such liturgies before Vatican II so they would have known about them.) The fathers wanted a liturgy communal in form, not merely in shared emotionality (or, less polemically, shared spirituality). One can debate endlessly whether this or that detail of the reformed rite follows the prescriptions of SC. That is rather beside the point. The main point is that the reformed liturgy is communal in form, – and this, and only this, is what Catholic liturgy is to be after Vatican II. How Summorum pontificum fits into this remains a mystery to me."

I can't believe my eyes when I read such drivel! Is the most important thing about the post-Vatican II Mass its communal nature and ecclesiology or is it God who gathers the community of believers both clergy and laity the most important aspect of the Liturgy, where the Paschal Mystery is made present for the salvation of souls, where the Mystical Body of Christ is made visible in time and place? Of these two things is there any difference in the pre-Vatican II Missals and the post-Vatican II Revised Missals?

Who is trying to kid whom here? Has ecclesiology and the communal nature of the Liturgy become damnable false idols? 

The revision of the Mass can never be considered an infallible act, even if the theology unpinning that revision is of a different theology that preceded it. Theology can't be dogmatic. Only dogmas and doctrines can be dogmatic.

YOU'VE GOT TO LOVE THE TRUTH AS IT LEAKS OUT: MEET THE NEW POPE--SAME AS THE OLD POPE!

The above headline is appropriate from two sources, first the Catholic media on reporting what is happening with the "investigation" into the American sisters, which, by the way, the head of the Congregation for Religous indicates is a part of his work, whereas the investigation into the LCWR and their heterodoxy is the work of the Congregation of the  Faith and that the two are seperate issues.

There is also new news on the Franciscans of the Immaculate and that their woes with Pope Francis isn't about the Extraordinary Form of the Mass:

Officials say final report on visitation of U.S. nuns expected soon

By Cindy Wooden
Catholic News Service

VATICAN CITY (CNS) -- Before the year dedicated to consecrated life begins in November, the Vatican congregation for religious hopes to release its final report on the 2009-2010 visitation of U.S. women's communities.

Archbishop Jose Rodriguez Carballo, secretary of the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies of Apostolic Life, said, "We are working intensely on the final report, and after careful study and consideration, we think it will be made public soon. We're at a good point. I think we can conclude it before the beginning of the Year for Consecrated Life" in November.

The former prefect of the congregation, Cardinal Franc Rode, initiated the visitation in January 2009, saying its aim would be to study the community, prayer and apostolic life of the orders to learn why the number of religious women in the United States had declined so sharply since the 1960s.

Archbishop Rodriguez Carballo and Cardinal Joao Braz de Aviz, the current congregation prefect, spoke to reporters Jan. 31 at the Vatican.

Cardinal Aviz said the visitation of U.S. communities of women was completely separate from the Vatican-ordered reform of the U.S.-based Leadership Conference of Women Religious. The LCWR process, which is ongoing, he said, is not the responsibility of his office, but of the Vatican Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which in 2012 ordered a reform of the group to ensure its fidelity to Catholic teaching in areas including abortion, euthanasia, women's ordination and homosexuality.

The Maryland-based LCWR is a Vatican-recognized organization that includes about 1,500 leaders of U.S. women's religious communities, representing about 80 percent of the country's 57,000 women religious.

The cardinal and archbishop also were asked about the appointment in August of a special commissioner to oversee the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate and Pope Francis' order requiring all the friars "to celebrate the liturgy according to the ordinary rite," the post-Vatican II Mass. Use of the so-called extraordinary form or pre-Vatican II Latin Mass "must be explicitly authorized by the competent authorities for every religious or community that makes a request," the pope had said.

Archbishop Rodriguez Carballo said the appointment of the commissioner came after an apostolic visitation during which "74 percent of the members requested, in writing, an urgent intervention by the Holy See to resolve problems within the institute."

The appointment of the commissioner was not "a punishment on the part of the Holy See," he said, but a benevolent act expressing "the maternity of the church."

The widespread use of the extraordinary form of the Mass by the friars "absolutely was not the principal motive for our intervention," the archbishop said.

In the case of the Legionaries of Christ, who for more than three years have been undergoing a process of reflection and renewal, the archbishop noted that the process is overseen by a delegate appointed by and responding directly to the pope.

The process began in 2010, following revelations that the Legionaries' founder, Father Marcial Maciel Degollado, fathered children and sexually abused seminarians. Priests of the order have been holding an extraordinary general chapter in Rome since Jan. 8 to elect new leaders and approve new constitutions.

Questions have been raised over the past three years about whether the Legionaries could continue to be true to the order's founding charism or inspiration when the Vatican itself said their founder had been guilty of "seriously and objectively immoral behavior" and "real crimes," and had lived a "life devoid of scruples and of genuine religious meaning."

"Something that we are becoming more and more aware of," Cardinal Aviz said, "is that you must distinguish between the founder who brings a charism and the charism itself. This is a distinction we are learning to make because, honestly, it applies not only in the case of the Legionaries, but we have several similar cases, both ancient and new."

The cardinal did not list other problematic founders, but said: "Not all founders who bring the church a grace that is good and beautiful live according to the grace they communicate. This is something we must recognize. This is how it is."

Fortunately for the church, the cardinal said, "Sometimes the founder and the grace coincide."


And then, the secular press in the form of the New York Post reports the following about Pope Francis and his orthodoxy:

Meet the new pope — same as the old pope

By Kyle Smith

January 31, 2014 | 12:15am

MORE FROM

Kyle Smith

Sorry, liberals: Pope Francis is not the Barack Obama of the Vatican.

The media’s fantasy that the new pope is a revolutionary determined to steer the Church left reached a new level of fatuousness this week when Rolling Stone gave Francis the full Lady Gaga treatment, placing him on its cover with the headline, “The Times They Are a-Changin’.”

No, they ain’t.

Rolling Stone joined Time (which crowned Francis its Person of the Year for 2013), The Advocate (ditto) and The New York Times in a group self-delusion that the pope is coming around to their views on economics, homosexuality and ordination of women.

The basis for all this is a misreading of a few out-of-context quotations, ignorance of longstanding church doctrine and (perhaps most of all) a frenzy to enlist the pope against the left’s favorite bogeymen, Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh.

In Rolling Stone, writer Mark Binelli swooned, noting that Palin called Pope Francis “kind of a liberal” (before backtracking) and Limbaugh denounced the pope’s views as “pure Marxism.” With enemies like those, the left thinks, Francis must be OK.

But MSNBC shouldn’t go booking the pope to co-host the Rachel Maddow Show just yet.

It’s hard for liberals (and maybe some conservatives) to wrap their heads around this, but Catholic doctrine doesn’t line up neatly with American views of left and right. The church is steadfastly pro-life on abortion (we associate that with conservatives) but equally pro-life on capital punishment (a view we call liberal). Nor has the Vatican altered its commitment to uplifting the poor or its related suspicion of capitalism.

Yes, Pope Francis critiqued “trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market alone, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice.”
But (pace Limbaugh), Francis also blasted Marxism, if not in the same speech: “The ideology of Marxism is wrong,” he said in December.

It’s not like Benedict XVI (whom Binelli compared to Freddy Krueger) was an apostle of Milton Friedman either: “Both capitalism and Marxism promised to point out the path for the creation of just structures,” he said in 2007. “And this ideological promise has proven false.
Capitalism, Benedict continued, left a “distance between rich and poor” and is “giving rise to a worrying degradation of personal dignity.”

Pope John Paul II showed perhaps the most enthusiasm for capitalism of any pope, yet even he said, “There are many human needs which find no place on the market. It is a strict duty of justice and truth not to allow fundamental human needs to remain unsatisfied.” He warned against a “radical capitalistic ideology” that lacks an “ethical and religious” core.

Did Francis (as the Times proclaimed last September) complain that the church was “obsessed” with gays, abortion and birth control? Not quite.

Here’s what he said: “The church’s pastoral ministry cannot be obsessed with the transmission of a disjointed multitude of doctrines to be imposed insistently.”

Nothing new here, either: The pope was just focusing on the big picture. Benedict said the same thing, albeit more directly, in 2006, noting that, for press interviews, “I always knew the questions in advance. They concerned the ordination of women, contraception, abortion. . . If we let ourselves be drawn into these discussions, the church is then identified with certain commandments or prohibitions; we give the impression that we are moralists with a few somewhat antiquated convictions, and not even a hint of the true greatness of the faith appears.”

Yes, Pope Francis said, “Who am I to judge a gay person of goodwill who seeks the Lord?” But this is consistent with the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which states that gays “must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

In 2010, while still just a cardinal, he called gay marriage “a destructive attack on God’s plan” and last year Francis was “shocked” by a gay-adoption bill, according to a bishop who discussed the matter with him. Ordination of women? Francis said in November that this was “not a question open for discussion.” Abortion? “Horrifying,” he said on Jan. 13.

There is a Bob Dylan song that encapsulates the media’s coverage of Pope Francis, but it isn’t “The Times They Are a-Changin’.” It’s “Idiot Wind.”

THE PRAYER OVER THE OFFERINGS I USED THIS MORNING IN A VOTIVE MASS FOR THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY: IS IT HERETICAL?

Our parish's parochical vicar, Father Godfred Boachie-Yiadom from Ghana now earning a Phd. in Mariology from the University of Dayton (now writing his dissertation here in Macon) concelebrated with me this morning's Mass.

I recently ordered and received the new "blue" Roman Missal, updated in the gloriously new English Translation of the Mass, that has many, many votive Masses for the Blessed Virgin Mary and additional wonderful prefaces for each Mass.

The ordo recommended for this morning votive Mass in honor of the Blessed Virgin Mary on a Saturday, one the Masses from the blue Missal's collection of Masses entitled  "The Blessed Virgin Mary and the Presentation of the Lord." (It is not the Feast Day Mass for February 2nd, btw.)

However, I only scanned the "Prayer over the Offerings" before hand and then stumbled as I prayed it during Holy Mass, thinking I had misread what I clearly thought sounded awfully heretical to me. But no, I read it correctly, but continued to think that whoever concocted this prayer must have made a huge heretical mistake. I was so concerned I asked for our resident Mariologist Priest, Fr. Godfred to comment on it for me. I'll post what he said in an update to this post when I receive sufficient comments for you all as it concerns the orthodoxy or heterodoxy or outright heresy of this Prayer over the Offerings.

But here it is with the offending, at least in my mind, line that looks like heresy to me:

"Lord, let our prayers and offerings be acceptable to you as we present them with joy in our hearts on this memorial of the Blessed Virgin Mary who made the offering of the poor to redeem her son, himself the redeemer of all. Through Christ our Lord." 

Have at it!

(And by the way we are blessing candles for Candlemas (Presentation of the Lord in the Temple/Purification of the Blessed Virgin Mary) at all our Masses this weekend including the Extraordinary Form Mass at 2:00 PM Sunday. It is a Low Mass as our Choir Director and Organist is on an extended leave due to a couple of serious surgeries! Please pray for her complete recovery. She's be out since before Christmas, Ms. Nelda Chapman, although we have wonderful musicians in place because of her to carry the ball with all the other Masses!)

SAINT JOSEPH CATHOLIC SCHOOL, MACON, DEDICATES ITS NEW $3.7 MILLION GYMN AND CLASSROOM ADDITION ON FRIDAY, JANUARY 31, 2014!

Here are a couple of news stories as the gym and additional classrooms were being built:

And the finished product just blessed!

I'M NOT REALLY OFFENDED BY THIS IMAGE OF THE HOLY FATHER OR THE VALUES IT COMMUNICATES TO THE WORLD, SO WHY REMOVE IT IN MY LOVELY ROMA?

Pope Francis superhero street art removed

'SuperPope' gone in a flash

Associated Press

Friday, Jan. 31, 2014

VATICAN CITY — Pope Francis’ status as a superhero has bit the dust.

GREGORIO BORGIA/ASSOCIATED PRESS

Artist Mauro Pallotta said he wants to try to paint Rome's Mayor Ignazio Marino next, as an anti-hero. 

 

Rome police early Thursday scrubbed the wall near the Vatican where “Super­Pope” had been displayed, showing Francis as Superman in flight and clutching his black satchel of values to spread to the world.

Artist Mauro Pallotta had put the image up Monday in homage to Francis.

Pallotta’s agent, Margaret Porpiglia, said Thursday the artist is now hoping to avoid a city fine.
The white caped crusader pope, which was actually painted on paper and affixed to the wall with water-based glue, had drawn immense popular interest around the Borgo neighborhood of tiny cobblestoned streets near St. Peter’s Square.

IS THERE AN "ONCTOLOGICAL" DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CLERGY AND LAITY? IN ONE WORD YES! DO COLORING BOOK CATHOLICS KNOW THIS?

To many conservative moderate Catholics, not just progressive ones, what Fr. John Zuhlsdorf of the blog WDTPRS writes about his clericalism and the distribution of Holy Communion would seem to be too right wing. But is it really and would there be a recovery of the sacred and a recovery of those who would want to be priests, meaning an increase in vocations to the priesthood?

Keep in mind that traditionalist communities, even those that celebrate the Ordinary Form of the Mass exclusively, are the ones providing vocations to the priesthood today. And those communities that are primarily Extraordinary Form are providing more, percentage wise, than most Ordinary Form parishes.

This is what Fr. Z writes in one of his posts (my comments follow):

"And, yes, I am a clericalist. I think that priests are special. I think that priests have their proper role in the Church. I think that priests are ontologically changed by the Sacrament of Orders. I think that we should not blur the roles of priests and lay people.

And, yes, yes, I include deacons too. One of the things deacons are ordained to do, is to distribute the Eucharist. Operative word in that last bit? Ordained.

Moreover, bishops could install men to the ministry of Acolyte, which would help solve this difficulty. But that’s another pot of borscht.

Also, if we really want to speed up Communion in a reverent way, then install Communion rails and distribute Communion on the tongue to people who are kneeling. Communion distribution goes much more efficiently that way and it is more reverent by far."

MY COMMENTS: Prior to going in the seminary, when I was an early teenager and into my first couple of years of the 20's, my family's parish in Augusta, Georgia, St.Joseph, which at that time was a wonderful multi-cultural parish primarily with many Europeans, directly from Europe, war brides, but also Asians from Korea and Vietnam, Panama, not to mention those from the U.S. Territory of Puerto Rico, and all this due to the U.S. Army post nearby, was a relatively traditional parish, but one that had implemented most of the liturgical changes after Vatican II.

Where our parish lagged, in comparison to many other parishes in Augusta and our diocese, but not all at that time, was standing for Holy Communion, Communion under both kinds and Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. We continued to kneel for Holy Communion well into 1975 I believe, if my memory serves me correctly. We didn't think any of this was "backwards pre-Vatican II crap" because our parish had a profound reverence and respect for the sacred.

I think it was around 1975 or 76, prior to my entrance into the seminary, that a new pastor required us to stand for Holy Communion, encouraged Communion in the hand and then provided on some occasions Holy Communion under both forms, first by intinction then later with the common chalice. Eventually Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion began to be commissioned. Prior to that, one of the other priests would pop out to assist with Holy Communion at the rail and then when standing. The church building wasn't big.

I do remember grumbling from my parents and others in the parish when we were forced to stand for Holy Communion and told that it was childish to kneel and receive on the tongue. We were told our faith was incomplete in the Most Holy Eucharist if we preferred a priest to distribute Holy Communion to us rather than a lay person. We were told that we were being silly if we didn't want to drink from a common chalice because it was culturally inimical to us and unsanitary. In other words, those who preferred priests to distribute Holy Communion while the laity knelt at the altar railing and received on the tongue were marginalized and ridiculed as being backwards and so pre-Vatican II!

But what has happened in most parishes today concerning reverence for the Most Holy Eucharist and vocations to the priesthood? Both have declined if we measure these two things as they existed for almost 2000 years in the Church prior to the novelties that developed in the immediate post-Vatican II period, true novelties disconnected from the majority of the Latin Rite Church's tradition for 2000 years, the vast, vast majority, despite any archeologist's attributions to these novelties.

So I would agree with Fr. Z and I would classify myself as a "clericalist" but not in the derogatory, elitist sense of that word that leads to pride and lack of accountability for truly aberrant behavior and attitudes including those behaviors that are immoral and illegal of the ordained.

So yes, as the Church teaches over the centuries in our Sacred Tradition, there is a difference between the ordained and the laity, there is an ontological difference as Fr. Z states it.

It would do us well to recover the sense of the sacred as this sense was understood in the Latin Rite prior to some of the more useless and unhelpful changes in the liturgy concerning the distribution of Holy Communion. We must recover the devotional reverence we once had at Mass but within the context of interior and exterior full, conscious and actual participation (even in the EF Mass, not just the OF Mass).

So, I would pray that one day the norms for the distribution of Holy Communion throughout the world would return to the previous pre-Vatican II practice. This alone will enhance the road to recovery and the reform of the reform as it concerns reverence and proper popular piety at Mass and at the time of receiving Holy Communion.

My only change or disagreement with Fr Z's argument  would be the following:

I would advocate that the "ministry of Acolyte" be the formal one that requires a bishop to install the person. This ministry would be a "permanent" ministry, not one leading to Holy Orders necessarily.

It would require a in-diocese seminary program lasting one to two years, with vigorous screening of candidates, where the program is one of spiritual, doctrinal and pastoral development of the person. The candidate would be trained in what it means to be an acolyte, appropriate Eucharistic piety and personal prayer and the example that is to be given in terms of Christian witness and service. Most of all the pastoral dimension of this ministry would be emphasized, that of bringing Holy Communion to the sick and homebound.

The Liturgical dress of this ministry would be the alb. Those who distribute Holy Communion as officially installed acolytes would wear the alb, be in the procession and sit in the sanctuary. Candidates for this "permanent" ministry can be male or female.

In addition, the same preparation and "seminary program" but one cleared for those to be readers would occur with the same screening process and pastoral formation and for both men and women.

Finally, to all those who say, but Father, but Father, why don't you do this now?

My answer is that the bishop of every local diocese is the primary liturgist of the diocese and can legislate or approve of various practices even the return to the pre-Vatican II model . But if he doesn't desire to do this or sees it as opposed to his own vision of liturgical practice and renewal, he can ask a priest to simply follow the norms of the General Instruction of the Roman Missal for the Distribution of Holy Communion in the USA approved by the proper ecclesiastical authorities and ultimately by the competent Roman Congregation.

What so many heterodox progressives and traditionalists seem to agree on is disobedience to one's bishop if what one's bishop goes against their particular ideologies. In other words, these Catholics of two extremes are cut from the same altar cloth.