I wonder how many rank and file Catholics really despise the new and glorious English translation of the Mass? To be honest with you, no one has complained to me about the intelligibility of our English Mass.
Yes, and I have said this over and over and over again, future revisions of the Roman Missal in English might tweak some of the prayers. This was done over the years with the inglorious English translation laid to rest about three years ago now.
Academics think their concerns are the most important. So when you read this, keep that in mind. Catholic academics are some of the worst clericalists in the world; they think they know better than anyone else and are used to grading people, but hate being graded themselves. Tenure gives them that advantage.
How many of you guys are at your absolute wit's end about the new and glorious translation of our English Mass? Never mind that you are trying to earn a living, put food on your table, clothe and educate your kids, live righteously and pay your tithes. What is really the most important thingy in your Catholic life, certainly it must be revising the new and glorious English translation of the Mass.
HERE'S CLERICALISM REVEALED TO ALL TO SEE IN THE LIGHT FROM THIS SURVEY OF PRIESTS:
The study reveals some disturbing trends about the trust Catholic clergy place in Church leadership.
Asked whether they are confident that the views of priests will be
taken seriously in future decision about liturgical translation, nearly
2/3 (63%) are not confident that they will be heard. The largest group
of clergy, 33%, disagree strongly that their views will be taken
seriously. Only 23% of clergy think that priests’ views will be taken
seriously, of which only 7% strongly agree with this sentiment.
Half of all clergy (50%) say they do not approve of the leadership
of the Holy See in Rome in bringing about the new missal, with 44%
supporting the Holy See.
I don't have the complete story, but maybe Sister Jane is like the Old Testament prophets and like Jesus Himself, some people just don't like the truth when it hurts their feelings. They want to kill the prophet, the messenger of the truth.
Jesus called people broods of vipers, whited sepulchers and the like. This certainly must have offended their sensitive ears especially if they were schooled in the "I'm okay, you're okay" ideologies of their day.
And now parents and their children well formed in the ideologies of praising everyone no matter what and giving awards to everyone, even those who don't deserve it, may be in for a rude awakening when they are called out for it by the Diocese of Charlotte.
LifeSiteNews is reporting the following:
The bishop of Charlotte is backing a Dominican nun who has been at the center of a fiery controversy since last month when she gave a speech promoting Catholic teaching on sexuality to students at Charlotte Catholic High School.
After a public meeting with diocesan and school officials turned ugly,
with parents and students alike shouting at administrators over what
they perceived as “hateful” remarks criticizing homosexual behavior,
divorce and extra-marital sex, a spokesman for the diocese told
LifeSiteNews that the nun in question, Sr. Jane Dominic Laurel, did
nothing wrong and will be welcome to speak on the issue again if she
chooses.
“Nothing in Sister’s talk opposed Church teaching,” Diocese of
Charlotte Communications Director David Hains told LifeSiteNews in an
email. “Sister would be welcomed to speak in the diocese in the
future.”
Hains said Bishop Peter Jugis is expected to make further public comment on the situation soon.
The Diocese of Charlotte’s newspaper, the Catholic News-Herald,
reported that the meeting was acrimonious, with those who dared to
speak out in support of Sr. Laurel or the Church being shouted down by
an angry mob. The paper’s sources called the atmosphere “disrespectful”
and “hate-filled.”
For Tuesday of Passiontide, the Old Testament reading for the Mass is about the serpents who bit the Jews in the desert and some of them dying. Moses is directed by God to make a bronze serpent and mount it on a poll and when those who had been bitten looked at it, they will be healed. Did the Jews of that period know that you could make a similar antidote for snake bites out of the very poison that can kill you? I doubt it. Yet a similar principle is at work in the bronze serpent fashioned by Moses at God's command. And this is related to Jesus to whom we look to save us from our sins. He becomes sin for us and takes our sins unto Himself and His Body. "Go and find it there, in the
wounds of the Lord and your sins will be healed, your wounds will be
healed, your sins will be forgiven."
The following is very true! Can you guess who said it? “Christianity
is not a philosophical doctrine, it’s not a programme for life survival
or education, or for peacemaking. These are consequences. Christianity
is a person, a person raised on the Cross, a person who annihilated
himself to save us, who became sin. Just as sin was raised up in the
desert, here God who was made man and made sin for us was raised up.
All our sins were there. You cannot understand Christianity without
understanding this profound humiliation of the Son of God who humbled
himself and became a servant unto death, even death on a cross, in order
to serve us.”
This
is why the apostle Paul said we do not have other
things to boast about, apart from our sins, and this is our misery. But
through the mercy of God, we rejoice in the crucified Christ. It’s for
this reason that ‘there is no Christianity without the Cross and
there’s no Cross without Jesus Christ.
“The Cross is not an
ornament that we must always put in the churches, there on the altar.
It is not a symbol that distinguishes us from others. The Cross is
mystery, the mystery of God who humbles himself, he becomes ‘nothing.’
He becomes sin. Where is your sin? ‘I don’t know, I have so many here.’
No, your sin is there, in the Cross. Go and find it there, in the
wounds of the Lord and your sins will be healed, your wounds will be
healed, your sins will be forgiven. The forgiveness that God gives us
is not the same as cancelling a debt that we have with Him, the
forgiveness that God gives us are the wounds of his Son on the Cross,
raised up on the Cross. May he draw us towards Him and may we allow
ourselves to be healed by Him.
My comments first: This Vatican Associated Press Reporter simply tells you what I have been saying all along! The press has misconstrued Pope Francis--he is a very conservative pope! AP Vatican reporter speaks about challenges, rewards of job:
AP
Vatican correspondent Nicole Winfield discussed the challenges and
rewards of reporting from the Vatican. Photo by Caroline Olney, photo
editor:
On April 4, Elon’s Society of Professional
Journalists, the School of Communications, and the Truitt Center hosted
Nicole Winfield, Vatican correspondent for the Associated Press.
Winfield discussed the balance between critical and delicate coverage
when reporting on religious figures as well as the stories she covered
in her years at the Vatican.
“I have a pretty low risk assignment, but there is another side of
reporting. Religious reporting can be particularly dangerous,” said
Winfield. “Religion matters to people; they take it very seriously.”
At the Vatican, Winfield has covered three popes—John Paul II,
Benedict XVI and Francis. She has unique insights into each papacy.
Throughout her lecture, Winfield put personal stories to the headlines
coming out of the Vatican.
When Pope Francis told reporters “who am I to judge” if someone is
gay, reports of a new progressive era for the Vatican swept across the
world. Winfield, however, does not believe we can go as far as to say he
is the ‘gay rights pope.’
“Don’t let Francis’ positive appeal mislead you; he’s a conservative
Catholic,” said Winfield. “He doesn’t care for a lot of ‘small minded
rules,’ but there are some rules that form the core of church doctrine.
Those won’t change. He is still against abortion and gay marriage.”
Several students who attended the lecture remarked that they did not know Francis’ comment had been misconstrued.
“I was surprised to hear her say Pope Francis is a conservative
pope,” said sophomore Shelby Lewis. “You always hear the media frame him
as a champion of social justice. It’s interesting to hear that many of
his quotes have been taken out of context.”
Winfield has had a front row seat to some of the Vatican’s most
precarious moments. She shared her insights into the three papacies,
noting how each one handled controversy within the church.
She describes Pope Benedict XVI as an academic with a gentle soul.
Though he had problematic relations with Jews, Winfield insists he made
efforts to mend ties later in his career. His relations with Muslims,
however, were not as friendly.
Francis, on the other hand, has made a name for himself as the
“interfaith” pope. He has held prayer services with people of many
faiths, and even washed the feet of Muslim men. Winfield recalled the
time Pope Francis hosted Jewish guests and “kosherized” the Vatican
kitchen.
“Do you know what that requires? You have to bring in a rabbi to
bless it and cleanse the oven by burning off impurities and do all this
stuff to make sure it’s kosher,” she said. “That doesn’t happen every
day at the Vatican.”
Winfield, who is Catholic, spoke about questions of objectivity when reporting on the Vatican.
“I cover the Vatican as I would cover any other institution. I treat
it as a bureaucracy, but I go at it with an incredible amount of respect
for my readership and the person I am covering,” she said.
With the loss of religious orders staffing our Catholic schools and little or no expectations of what it means for a Catholic or even a non-Catholic to teach in our schools, our Catholic schools continue to lose their Catholic identity and become like their non-sectarian private school counterparts.
Often times, Catholic schools in the south who depend on non-Catholics enrolling in these schools (who sometimes pay a higher tuition than the Catholics, but not always, Mt. de Sales Academy in Macon a case in point) will be more than happy to water down the Catholic faith so as not to push these non-Catholics into the other very fine religious and non-sectarian schools that are available.
When our Catholics schools were staffed primarily by religious orders, the Catholicity of the school was upheld and certainly the sisters or brothers or priests who staffed these schools pushed Catholic doctrine and morality to the hilt. I am sure many Catholic girls of this era will recall Sister measuring how far above the knee their school uniform dress was and if it was too high, they were sent home.
What are some of the problems with completely lay staffs, some Catholic and very much so, others cultural Catholics; others purely non-practicing Catholics and still others of other faiths or no faith at all, in our Catholic schools in various parts of the country?
The following are examples I have heard in other dioceses and some of which have been in the news:
1. Atheists on staff who make it known to their charges that they don't believe in God!
2. Catholics who are in illicit marriages and at school Masses are extraordinary minister of Holy communion, despite the fact that they rarely if ever attend Mass on Sunday.
3. Catholics who openly disagree with the faith and morals of the Catholic Church, even infallible teachings such as those on sexuality, the ordination of only men, etc
4. Catholics who live openly immoral lifestyles and openly live with their significant other, whether in a gay or straight union
I am a great supporter of Catholic education. However, I see in my parish Catholic parents who home-school their children and whose children are far more mature, religiously oriented, embrace the faith in its fullness and live modest, holy lives. This part of homeschooling was very much a part of our Catholic school system up until a generation or two ago but now no longer.
Many of our Catholic parents no longer are the backbone of our parishes and seldom come to Mass with their children.
Why have we allowed our Catholic schools to become like their non-sectarian counterparts? Who's sin is this and when will we turn the ship of Catholic education around in our dioceses?
This is what one Catholic school system is doing:
Catholic Teacher Contract Gets Exact On Behavior
| by
LISA CORNWELL
Posted:
Updated:
CINCINNATI (AP) — The doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church
is so complex the Archdiocese of Cincinnati is giving teachers a cheat
sheet on some of the things that can get them fired.
A new
contract proposal from the diocese specifies some violations of Catholic
doctrine that could put teachers out of a job — including abortion,
artificial insemination and "homosexual lifestyles" — and extends
forbidden behavior to include public support for those kinds of causes,
drawing some complaints that the language is overly broad and a cynical
attempt to make it harder for wrongfully terminated teachers to sue.
Teachers
have long been required to act in accordance with the Roman Catholic
Church's philosophy but it's rare for an archdiocese to include examples
of forbidden behavior in its contract. The archdiocese says it's fairer
to teachers this way.
"It clarifies what is expected of all of our teachers," archdiocese spokesman Dan Andriacco said.
The
new language comes after a series of lawsuits and other problems
involving educators fired over alleged doctrinal violations in the
archdiocese.
Last year, a federal jury found the archdiocese
discriminated against a Cincinnati-area teacher fired for violating
Catholic doctrine when she became pregnant through artificial
insemination and awarded her $171,000. The teacher said she didn't know
artificial insemination violated doctrine. Terms weren't disclosed in
last year's settlement of another lawsuit against the archdiocese by an
unmarried Dayton-area teacher who said she was fired after becoming
pregnant.
Catholic schools in California, Pennsylvania, Montana
and other states have faced lawsuits or parent complaints in recent
years over firings stemming from doctrinal violations, but the National
Association of Catholic School Teachers said it knows of no other
archdiocese that has instituted the kind of language planned in
Cincinnati.
Andriacco said the contract doesn't require anything the archdiocese didn't already expect of teachers.
"The
contract requires that if you are going to represent the Catholic
church as a teacher, you are not going to publicly oppose the teachings
of the Catholic church," he said.
Besides citing a broad range of
prohibited activities including use of a surrogate mother and sexual
activity outside of marriage, the contract specifically bans "improper"
use of social media. Teachers would also be barred from "public
membership" in organizations with missions conflicting with church
doctrine.
The president of the Philadelphia-based National
Association of Catholic School Teachers says some educators in the
archdiocese have contacted the union with contract concerns, even though
the union doesn't represent them.
"This contract is way over the top and very oppressive," said union president Rita Schwartz.
Mike
Moroski, a Cincinnati-area school administrator fired last year over
personal blog comments he made in support of gay marriage, says some of
the approximately 2,000 teachers covered by the contract aren't happy
but are afraid to speak out for fear of losing their jobs. He said the
new language could force teachers to conceal specifically prohibited
behaviors.
"This contract will force some people to lie to keep their jobs, and they don't want to do that," he said.
Parents
and other parishioners critical of the contract wording are working on
petitions and plan to meet with the superintendent of the archdiocese's
schools, said Mark McLaughlin, president of the Parent Teacher
Association at Nativity School, an elementary school in Cincinnati.
"I am concerned that the archdiocese could lose a lot of good teachers and enrollment will decline," McLaughlin said.
The
contract language even raises new questions about what teachers can
support, even if their own behavior is in line with church teachings,
McLaughlin said.
"The current wording of the contract is confusing, especially as to what 'public support' means," he said.
Andriacco said the archdiocese won't budge on the language.
"This
is essentially a moral position and it's not going to be driven by
public opinion," he said. "This is our contract, and it's not going to
change."
The new contract also for the first time describes every
teacher as a "teacher-minister," wording legal experts view as an
attempt to prevent fired teachers from bringing wrongful termination
charges.
A U.S. Supreme Court ruling has said religious groups can
dismiss "ministerial" employees without government interference,
although Andriacco says the archdiocese has always considered all of its
teachers as ministerial employees.
David Ball, co-chairman of the
Religious Organizations Subcommittee of the American Bar Association,
said labeling someone a minister doesn't necessarily make them one.
"I'm not sure that would hold up in all cases," he said.
Most
religious institutions contain "morals" clauses in their contracts,
according to the Rev. Ronald Nuzzi, a senior director in the University
of Notre Dame's Alliance for Catholic Education, but no numbers are
available on how many of the 195 U.S. Catholic dioceses and archdioceses
may be adding specific prohibitions.
The teacher contract in the
Diocese of Toledo does contain specific prohibitions, although officials
there said the terms are confidential. Dioceses in Cleveland and
Steubenville were reviewing their contracts, and representatives said
more specific prohibitions were possible.
Bishop Robert Vasa of
the Diocese of Santa Rosa in California temporarily postponed
establishing similar language last year after realizing he needed to
better educate teachers and parents on the issue.
"But at some point, we need as a Catholic church to draw a line," he said.
David
Thole, a Catholic school parent in suburban Cincinnati, approves of the
new contract's language. He says he wants his children to understand
and follow church teachings "not just on Sunday, but in their daily
lives."
Christine Inkrot Schroder, a Catholic in Cincinnati, says
her now-grown children attended Catholic school, but she opposes the new
contract.
"They are trying to mandate how people think," Schroder
said. "We taught our children equality and respect, and we could not
have sent them to a school that supports such open discrimination."
SMYRNA, Georgia (AP) — The Roman
Catholic archbishop of Atlanta said Saturday that he will sell a $2.2
million mansion just three months after he moved in as he tried to
appease angry parishioners who insisted that he follow the example set
by Pope Francis.
Archbishop
Wilton Gregory announced the decision following a closed-door meeting
with members of several church councils at his headquarters. He publicly
apologized Monday for building the Tudor-style residence and will move
out in early May.
"I have
decided to sell the Habersham property and invest the proceeds from that
sale into the needs of the Catholic community," Gregory told The
Associated Press after the meeting. He declined to take questions.
A group of Catholics in Gregory's diocese had asked since January that
he sell off the more than 6,000-square-foot (560-square-meter) home in
keeping with the tone of austerity set by Pope Francis. Elected last
year, Francis said he wants a church for the poor, drives in an economy
car and lives in a guestroom instead of a Vatican palace. He has
denounced the "idolatry of money" and warned against "insidious
worldliness" within the church.
I don't have a complete picture of how bishops lived prior to the Second Vatican Council. I know in the northeast and Midwest, bishops lived in grand homes with full time staff. It was a sign to the Catholics of that time that an immigrant Church had made it in America.
The same is true of Saint Joseph Church in Macon. Begun in 1889 and completed in 1903 it was a statement to this Protestant community that the Catholic Church while small in Macon was grand in stature. The Jesuits who built this church made sure that the steeples would make the church look taller than the First Baptist Church a stone's throw next to it but which was built on higher ground.
The parishioners of that time could hardly afford such a majestic building, yet from their meager earnings they built this church which remains an icon of Catholicism in middle Georgia.
What does it say to southerners in the birthplace of the novel and movie "Gone With the Wind" that an African American Archbishop who inherits an estate from the nephew of Margaret Mitchell who then spends $2.2 million of that estate for a 6000 square foot mansion in Atlanta's most exclusive neighborhood? There is some irony here with "Gone with the Wind" and money from that estate to build a new kind of Tara that Hatti McDaniel herself would have enjoyed owning. Perhaps Augusta native Butterfly McQueen would have been thrilled with it too. Who would begrudge them?
I wonder too who complained the most about this mansion in the Atlanta community? Were they rich whites accustomed to high living or recently rich African Americans? Did poor African Americans criticize the Archbishop?
Times, they have changed in the southern Catholic Church. I can remember in my childhood parish of Saint Joseph Church on the wrong side of the tracks in Augusta, Georgia when in the early 1960's Fr. Nick Quinlan who had lived for a couple of years in a bedroom off of the sacristy of the small framed Church built in the 1950's and only recently moved into a modest small rectory built to house three priests also built a three car open air carport behind it.
My army Sargent father who was renting a home down the road from the Church for $60 a month for his wife and three children was outraged that Fr. Quinlan was building such an extravagant carport for his car. Our rental didn't have a carport or a paved driveway. Today that carport has been torn down and a very, very nice ranch home rectory has been built there with a three car enclosed garage.
So I suspect my father would be turning in his grave if he isn't in heaven to hear of the Archbishop of Atlanta building a $2.2 million residence. But we do have to account for inflation!
Also I remember that in the early 1960's priests made very little. In fact when I was ordained in 1980 apart from room and board, we received a $200 a month stipend for personal use and savings and a $200 a month stipend for the purchase of our automobile and its upkeep to include gas, maintenance and insurance! We had Mass stipends too, maybe upwards to $1,000 a year.
Nuns and religious when they were required to wear habits and clerical clothing did not have a closet full of clothes either. Nuns had no more than two to three habits and that was it! I don't recommend looking in the closets of too many nuns. Apart from their garish tastes, one might be shocked at how much is in there. The same with priests.
I can remember going to a cocktail party for a Catholic hospital fundraiser where the sisters who once ran the hospital came in wearing evening gowns, heavy make-up and jewelry. Only oldsters like me were scandalized; no one else seem to care or to think that this was out of place for women religious vowed to poverty and chastity.
So is Pope Francis on the right track with his version of the "Reform of the Reform in Continuity with the Pre-Vatican II Church?" Should we go back to the simplicity of life for most rank and file clergy to include bishops as well as religious? Should we clean out our closets and downsize our wardrobes?
Well, of course at St. Joseph Church in Macon we veiled! It is Passiontideafter all! In some of the photos below you will also see the progress that began on Tuesday of extending the first step of the sanctuary forward to accommodate our new altar railing.
But the most pressing issue or question is, "did you parish veil statues? Does your parish have statues?
At the Praytell so-called liturgical blog also known for its well deserved nickname Praywhine, there will be a new round of whining about the liturgy and its spectacularly wonderful, compared to what preceded it, new and glorious English translation of the Mass. Talk about repeating oneself over and over and over and over and over again.
Of course the manipulation of its editors will be that it is the bleeding hearts of so many whining priests who feel so put upon by the imposition of the new and most wonderful English translation of the Mass that they will rehash over and over and over again their disgruntled attitudes about what the Church has given to them for the liturgy because after all they and their comfortable congregations suffer so much over this!
It is to laugh and I am really, really, really sure this sorry a** attitude will really resonate with Pope Francis and his truck driving, motorcycle loving sensibilities. Certainly these priests should go to the periphery and minister there rather than stoking their unmet emotional liturgical needs by their immature, adolescent, authority issues that would have best been settled and resolved when they were teenagers rather than now as aging priests?
But then I thought about Pope Francis and his approach to the liturgy. He is quiet, sober and says the black and does the red (admittedly not for the mandatum, but is that really a part of the Mass or an extension of the homily, shouldn't the maniple be off as well as the chasuble?)
Praytell(and whine) was overjoyed beyond being giddy when they thought that within days of Pope Francis being named the new pope that he would throw out the current Congregation for Divine Worship's head and make Archbishop Pietro Marini (Blessed Pope John Paul II's progressive Master of Ceremonies) the prefect for the Congregation of Divine Worship.
I suggested to the editor of Praytell and whine that maybe he had the wrong Marini and that it would be Msgr. Guido Marini.
But here it is in the second year of this Pontificate and no new head for the Congregation for Divine Worship has been named.
What does it mean from the point of view of symbol?
1. Pope Francis is not a liturgist who wants to constantly tinker with or bicker about the liturgy. Liturgists are terrorists as everyone knows, just read the comments on liturgy here and at Praytell, especially Praytell, and you know what type of corrupt Catholicism I am talking about. 2. Pope Francis wants to return the Church to the pre-Vatican II attitude about the Liturgy, but this time about the Liturgy that we have been given after Vatican II--that is not to complain about it. Apart from a clique of liturgical academics in the early 20th century who won the day at the Second Vatican Council, who in the world criticized the pre-Vatican II Mass during the pre-Vatican II days? It would have been considered not only a mortal sin but a sacrilege to critique and malign the liturgy of the Church. It simply wasn't done by rank and file, normal Catholic clergy and laity.
So, Pope Francis has been reforming the curia, but he is leaving whatever changes he wants to make to the Congregation for Divine Worship to the last. Isn't that interesting and what does that say to liturgists also known as terrorists?
The Dominican sister who gave a presentation on sexuality to students at
Charlotte Catholic High School that sparked controversy among students
and parents last month is taking a sabbatical from teaching and
canceling her other speaking engagements.
In an April 4 statement, the president of Aquinas College
defended the school’s curriculum and Sister Jane’s credentials as a
theologian, but acknowledged that the portion of Sister Jane’s
presentation of social science data about the alleged causes of same-sex
attraction – which prompted many of the concerns from parents and
students – was outside the scope of her academic background.
The statement reads in part:
“We believe it is our privilege to bring the best aspects
of our faith tradition to bear on the moral and cultural questions of
the present age. In her presentation, Sister Jane Dominic spoke clearly
on matters of faith and morals. Her deviation into realms of sociology
and anthropology was beyond the scope of her expertise. Sister is a
trained theologian from a Pontifical University and has the credentials
to contribute to scholarly bodies of work. This she has done in the past
with distinction. The unfortunate events at Charlotte Catholic High
School are not representative of the quality of Sister’s academic
contributions or the positive influence that she has had on her
students. The students at Charlotte Catholic were unprepared, as were
their parents, for the topic that Sister was asked to deliver. The
consequence was a complete misrepresentation of the school’s intention
to bring a message that would enlighten and bring freedom and peace.”
MY COMMENTS FIRST: Since I wasn't at the talk or the meeting after the talk this past Wednesday, we can only rely upon news reports. It seems that the meeting on Wednesday was ugly, hateful and anything but Catholic--or maybe this reality is the new Catholicism of the modern era? At any rate, what a sad state of affairs when a Catholic sister teaches what the Church teaches and uses statistics that prove to upset some who were in attendance. It does go against the current philosophy of most educational institutions today, even Catholic, that children and adults must be praised no matter what, given awards even if they don't deserve them and be recognized even if their work is unworthy of recognition. Just go to any Catholic school's end of the year awards program and see who doesn't get something.
Where did this come from? And how will the narcissists we are producing function in the real world?
What the Charlotte controversy reveals about the acceptance of Catholic teaching
News coverage is now available for the resolution of complaints about Sister Jane Dominic Laurel’s controversial presentation at a Catholic high school in Charlotte, North Carolina. The Nashville Dominican sister spoke at a school assembly about Church teaching on marriage, divorce, homosexuality and gay marriage, and on the impact the disregard of Catholic teaching and the natural has on children growing up in broken our unnatural home environments.
Complaints were numerous enough that a special meeting was called to discuss the matter, and diocesan officials decided to apologize for two things: First, that the school had not notified parents of the assembly and its sensitive contents; and second, that Sister Jane Dominic would have been better advised to leave out the data she used on the last portion of her talk, data which shows the deleterious effects on children of aberrant marital arrangements, because the value of that data is debated.
This resolution meets the minimum standard I proposed in my original discussion of this incident, “that any appropriate apology or correction will be accompanied by a clear reaffirmation of the reality of Divine Revelation and the certainty of Catholic teaching on these important subjects.” The apologies made do affirm Church teaching, in that it is specifically stated that the presentation did conform to Catholic doctrine. Problems are acknowledged only in the handling of certain data.
I have no objection to the statement that parents should have been forewarned (even though this may also have been met with a negative reaction). But the second apology is weak for two reasons. The first reason is the one I gave in my original discussion:
[I]t is imperative that nothing be allowed to detract from what ought to become an even more spectacular teaching moment. Therefore, it would be even better to avoid distracting side issues altogether. This means extending the benefit of any doubt to Sr. Jane Dominic, such that the correctness of her presentation of the Church’s infallible teaching is reaffirmed and defended without a single caveat.
The second reason is that the data on the impact of aberrant marital situations on children is overwhelming in showing that these children are far more likely to suffer emotional instability, uncontrolled anger, severe insecurity, and affective disorders throughout their lives. This or that piece of data may be debated, but the only people who contest the massive weight of the data as a whole are those who are championing an artificial vision of reality opposed to the natural law. Lending credibility to this sort of “debate”, which is absolutely unavoidable no matter what sociological studies prove, is one of those distractions which should not have been admitted. I fear that the second apology as phrased by the diocese’s vicar for education gives away too much in an effort to placate those who loudly objected to the talk, though the chaplain who arranged the assembly, Fr. Matthew Kauth, issued a better and more explanatory statement.
As far as I have been able to determine from the limited correspondence I received from some of those who objected to Sr. Jane Dominic’s presentation, the tactic chosen for the formal complaint was to insist that nobody was questioning Church teaching. Rather, the formal complaint was against the presentation of the alleged familial consequences of ignoring Church teaching. Such practical data was referred to in a variety of ways, such as “scare tactics” and “hateful”. Thus, for example, the presentation was deemed hurtful to single parents struggling to raise children under difficult circumstances; and also hurtful in that it indicated that gays could not, in actual practice, be fit parents. In this sense, the objection gave the Catholic officials a way out, and they took it.
A Much Deeper Problem
But it is just here that we recognize a more subtle but also much deeper problem. If you read the news report, you will see that tempers were very high over this problem of “data”, and that those who thought the whole presentation was just fine were shouted down. What this means is that there were many people professing to accept Church teaching (or at least choosing not to object to its presentation in a Catholic school) who nonetheless became extremely upset because the actual demonstrable practical consequences of living in opposition to Church teaching were enumerated.
We have slipped here into a pattern all too common in Catholic life today: The idea that the Church may teach something (yeah, yeah) but it really doesn’t matter. People can do what they deem best, and their way for them will be as good as anything. This attitude is false, and Sister Jane Dominic committed the cardinal sin of demonstrating its falsity. In point of fact, “their way for them” will not be as good as anything. It will not only be spiritually deadening, but also have disastrous concrete, practical consequences, including negative impacts on others which are statistically measurable.
The acceptance of Church teaching must go beyond theoretical assent to a lived commitment, and that lived commitment includes an awareness of the many deeply unfortunate consequences of living in denial of the realities which Church teachings (and the natural law) describe.
It is for this reason that parents who are raising children in the aftermath of divorce, spousal death, or abandonment face such a difficult challenge. Insofar as they bear responsibility for the broken family, this is seriously sinful. Insofar as they do not, it is a heavy cross. They need to know that it will take a life of prayer, heroic virtue and grace to prevent the consequences from injuring their children. They also need to know that with God all things are possible. But the last thing they need is to believe it is no big deal.
The same realities apply to children raised by gay “parents”. It is true that some gay “parents” can be better at some aspects of parenting—for example, ensuring physical safety or helping with math homework—than parents in families founded on true marriage. It is also true that not all gay “parents” will deliberately abuse their children, whereas some real parents will in fact do so. But all of this is beside the point. It is actually intrinsically abusive to place a child in a home to be raised by gay “parents”, or to permit gay “parents” to manufacture children for themselves under any circumstances. In addition to being a deliberate violation of a child’s natural right to be raised by a mother and a father, at the very least gay “parenting” is deeply abusive in terms of the normal affective development of the child.
We cannot “play house” without dire consequences. There is a natural order to things which, when we fail to perceive it in nature, is made clear to us through Revelation and Catholic doctrine. The consequences of evading and denying that order are both naturally and supernaturally grave. Refusing to admit the consequences is a cultural accommodation and a self-deception that actually rises to the level of practical dissent. An authentic recognition and response to reality is an important part of what it means to accept the teachings of the Church.
If you are a political activist who happens to be a Catholic who believes as Pope Francis, every other pope and the entire Catholic Church has taught from the beginning, that marriage is a Sacrament between one man and one woman and for a lifetime, be ready to sacrifice your career!
The fascists in the gay-rights movement want blood and they are getting it. They don't care about your religious beliefs or that as a Catholic you have a right to bring those beliefs to the public square. If you do, you will be persecuted, maligned and sent to the periphery and without a job.
How well prepared are believing, practicing Catholics to face this kind of persecution?
This is what Pope Francis wrote in his exhortation, "The Joy of the Gospel":
The process of secularization tends to reduce the faith and the Church
to the sphere of the private and personal. Furthermore, by completely
rejecting the transcendent, it has produced a growing deterioration of
ethics, a weakening of the sense of personal and collective sin, and a
steady increase in relativism. These have led to a general sense of
disorientation, especially in the periods of adolescence and young
adulthood which are so vulnerable to change. As the bishops of the
United States of America have rightly pointed out, while the Church
insists on the existence of objective moral norms which are valid for
everyone, “there are those in our culture who portray this teaching as
unjust, that is, as opposed to basic human rights. Such claims usually
follow from a form of moral relativism that is joined, not without
inconsistency, to a belief in the absolute rights of individuals. In
this view, the Church is perceived as promoting a particular prejudice
and as interfering with individual freedom”.[59]
We are living in an information-driven society which bombards us
indiscriminately with data – all treated as being of equal importance –
and which leads to remarkable superficiality in the area of moral
discernment. In response, we need to provide an education which teaches
critical thinking and encourages the development of mature moral values.
Anti-Gay Marriage Mozilla CEO Resigns After Backlash
Brendan Eich, the newly named CEO of the software firm Mozilla Corporation, resigned from the post after angering gay rights activists and some in the tech industry for his opposition to same-sex marriage.
Eich's views on gay marriage came to light in the days following his appointment last week to run Mozilla, best-known for its Firefox browser. News re-emerged of a $1,000 donation he made in 2008 supporting California's Proposition 8, an anti-gay marriage referendum.
Since then two former Mozilla developers and the dating site OKCupid, among others, have publicly condemned the software development firm for appointing a known supporter of the anti-gay law -- voters passed Prop 8, but it was later shot down by the Supreme Court. Critics urged that web users try a different browser.
Mozilla initially tried to bat away concerns about Eich's ideology .
The company explained in a blog post on Thursday:
We didn’t act like you’d expect Mozilla to act. We didn’t move fast enough to engage with people once the controversy started. We’re sorry. We must do better.
Brendan Eich has chosen to step down from his role as CEO. He’s made this decision for Mozilla and our community.
Mozilla believes both in equality and freedom of speech. Equality is necessary for meaningful speech. And you need free speech to fight for equality. Figuring out how to stand for both at the same time can be hard.
Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all.
We have employees with a wide diversity of views. Our culture of openness extends to encouraging staff and community to share their beliefs and opinions in public. This is meant to distinguish Mozilla from most organizations and hold us to a higher standard. But this time we failed to listen, to engage, and to be guided by our community.
While painful, the events of the last week show exactly why we need the web. So all of us can engage freely in the tough conversations we need to make the world better.
We need to put our focus back on protecting that Web. And doing so in a way that will make you proud to support Mozilla.
While there is no clear replacement in line for CEO, Mozilla executive chairwoman Mitchell Baker insisted that the company is not without options, saying in an interview this morning that "[t]here are certainly very talented people we have talked to, so we are not at ground zero by any means."
The Mandatum for Holy Thursday, which refers to the "washing of the feet" during the Evening Mass of the Lord's Supper is an optional ritual. The priest can decide to have it or not.
Every year, certain liturgical types get all bent out of shape if their version of the Mandatum and their understanding of the rubrics isn't followed explicitly.
As most of you know, I can see both sides of every issue.
Holy Thursday is the celebration of two sacraments that require, let me repeat, require each other. The first Sacrament Jesus' instituted on Holy Thursday is that of Holy Orders, the priesthood. Because through this Sacrament which Christ institutes, priests from that day forward will do what Jesus requires them to do when He institutes the second sacrament of Holy Thursday, the Most Holy Eucharist.
While Jesus certainly wants the Christian priesthood He institutes to be in continuity with the Old Testament version, He does not want the Sacrament of Holy Orders to be only about worship and ritual purity. He wants His new order of priesthood to be of service to the needy, the disenfranchised, those who live on the margins of society, what Pope Francis calls the periphery.
So as High Priest and example to all in Holy Orders, Jesus shows not only the early ritual of the Holy Eucharist but also the aspect of service symbolized by Him washing the feet of the apostles. They are to do the same for those they will shepherd.
The optional ritual of washing feet on Holy Thursday can be approached in two ways.
First it could be celebrated in a literal way as Jesus does at the Last Supper with the bishop/priest washing the feet of 12 other priests. In local parishes, where it is impossible to find 12 priests or transitional deacons, altar boys have substituted. In recent times twelve lay men who have no intention of becoming priests are chosen.
This is perfectly legitimate and ties in well with the literal theme of the Liturgy and the reenactment of what Jesus actually did at the Last Supper for His twelve Apostles.
Or the other aspect of the Washing of the Feet by Jesus could be celebrated, that all followers of Christ by virtue of the universal priesthood of the laity are called to go and wash feet as a symbol of their service to the needy, whether the need be spiritual or material.
In this case, the priest would wash the feet of men and women, boys and girls as a sign of the Church washing the feet of all, no matter their religion or gender. This is what Pope Francis did last year and the power of his symbol in washing the feet of two Muslim women in addition to the others. It was a sign of what Pope Francis understand his new ministry as the Bishop of Rome to be, to be a servant to those in need. All bishops, priests and deacons are suppose to do that! The laity are too!
Many places have the bishop or priest washing the feet of men and women, usually Catholic men and women. Fewer now wash the feet of altar boys. Even fewer wash only the feet of all priests, transitional deacons or seminarians.
It can be diverse in the manner in which it is ritualized. It is optional. But no matter how it is done, the first priority is to remind those in Holy Orders that worship and service go hand-in-hand. The celebration of the Sacraments and the Word of God is to be coupled with service to those in need.
The other priority is to show all the baptized that faith and good works go hand-in-hand. Catholicism must go to the periphery and serve the needs of all.The Catholic identity of both clergy and laity is to be brought to the public square and not locked up behind the doors of the Church and kept in the Holy of Holies of the sanctuary!
In the video of Archbishop Wilton Gregory giving a lecture on the Liturgy, he did a very nice, but somewhat tedious, survey of the Liturgical Movement of the early 20th Century that led Pope Pius XII to begin to make certain reforms in the Mass of that period. The apex of that development prior to Vatican II is the 1962 Missal that has been released from the bondage of the Church's history museum.
Sacrosanctum Concilium and later the Vatican Commission Consilium brought to bear many of the changes proposed by the Liturgical Movement of the early 20th Century.
Among these are:
1. Mass facing the People
2. Vernacular
3. More Scripture in the lectionary
Often when a group of academics begin to critique something about the Church they do so independently of the people who are formed by what is critiqued. For example the Mass prior to the Second Vatican Council had formed Catholics and their piety and spirituality and their way of life for centuries. One might say for 1500 years.
In the 20th Century these Catholics while diverse in zeal and authenticity of faith, at least attended Mass on Sunday. Some estimates in this country prior to and right after Vatican II is that almost 90% of Catholics attended the Mass that academic theologians have so denigrated in the last 100 years.
Now that many of the recommendations of these academic liturgical theologians have been applied to the manner in which the Mass is celebrated, in this country we are seeing about 20% of Catholics actually attending Mass each Sunday and in some places it is even lower. In Europe it is abysmal.
Yet without scientific evidence or sociological studies of any kind, those who think that the manner in which the reform of the Mass has progressed in the last 45 years still insist that if no changes had been made in the Church's liturgy things would be worse today than they are. This seems to me to be an incredible statement based upon opinion, subjectivity and no legitimate analysis.
On top of that of the 20%, more or less, of Catholics who bother to attend Mass on Sunday, one cannot presume with any certainty that the majority of that 20% actually believes what the Church teaches about the Mass or any other doctrine or dogma of the Catholic Church.
Often, in describing the fruits of the reformed Mass of Vatican II, academic liturgical theologians are quick to point out that the Mass embodies today the post-Vatican II ecclessiology. I wonder how many Mass goers of the 20%, more or less, who bother to come to Mass are impressed with this fact, that their gathering somehow shows better what the nature of the Church is compared to the 1962 Missal?
I am a realist and thus accept the Ordinary Form of the Mass as the Ordinary Form even though I think all that needed to happen to the 1962 Missal was more vernacular, especially with the changing parts of the Mass and more Scripture in a revised lectionary, and the congregation participating actually, both internally and externally, that nothing more really needed to be changed. I would go so far as to say that the "Liturgy of the Word" with lay readers and in the post-Vatican II fashion could easily have been incorporated into the 1962 Missal.
What did not need to take place and caused undo strife and division in the Church and has led to a diminution of the pure faith and morals of the Church are:
1. Mass facing the people--has led to a form of clericalism on steroids and the manipulation of the Mass by the clergy.
2. The loss of sacred silence while prayer to God is actually happening--especially in the Eucharistic Prayer--restoring silence to the post-Vatican II Mass always is independent of actual prayer ritual of the Mass and becomes a private, quiet devotion period for all, such as after readings, after the homily and after Holy Communion and is a bit tedious if too long--silence while some ritual action of actual prayer is quite different, such as the Roman Canon prayed quietly allowing for the priest's bodily gestures to be a sort of sign language in the sacred silence.
3. The loss of Catholic piety and reverence at the time of Holy Communion by eliminating kneeling for Holy Communion, allowing Holy Communion in the hand and the proliferation of Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion with little or no expectations of who is chosen and consistency in training.
4. The loss of sacred silence in the Church and the moving of the tabernacle to obscure places, the treating of the Church building, nave and sanctuary simply as a meeting place and nothing more.
I am a realist. I don't expect that the Church will significantly change the Order of the Ordinary Form of the Mass or mandate Latin for any parts of the Mass. I do pray and can hope that at least ad orientem will be encouraged and not mocked and that kneeling for Holy Communion and receiving in the traditional manner will be restored. Simply doing these two things will have a dramatic impact on going back to the past in order to come back to the future.
Archbishop Wilton Gregory of Atlanta spends $2.2 million on a lovely southern mansion. The bling bishop in Germany spends about $45 million on his residence and pastoral center with some extravagant non-essential elements thrown in.
About 25 miles outside of Augusta, Georgia, my hometown, there is what we natives call the "bomb plant." It was built during the heyday of the cold war, in the 1950's to help produce this nation's atomic bombs, nuclear weapons. It produced a key component for these weapons, a very highly, radioactive element called plutonium weaponized into tritium.
Up until the end of the cold war toward the mid 1990's about 30,000 people were employed there with high paying jobs. After the cold war production of tritium ended and turned to clean up and other more peaceful missions. I think the work force is about 15,000 now.
One of their primary missions of recent times is to deal with all the left over, highly radioactive, quite dangerous plutonium. The government to date has spent $3.9 BILLION on this project. You read that right, $3.9 BILLION!
NOW THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IS SCRAPPING THE BUILDING OF THE FACILITY AND ITS ENSUING MISSION AFTER HAVING SPENT OR SHALL I SAY WASTED $3.9 BILLION!
Here is the Augusta Chronicle's news story on this:
In recent years, the Obama administration has slowed funding for the
MOX project that has cost taxpayers $3.9 billion on so far, according to
the NNSA. Cost estimates for the program’s life cycle had risen to $30
billion.
The administration said in its fiscal 2015 budget proposal released
Tuesday that a yearlong review of the MOX program signaled a need for
quicker, more cost-effective methods to dispose of surplus Russian and
U.S. weapons-grade plutonium.
“A review of this approach has determined that the MOX fuel approach
is significantly more expensive than planned and it is not viable within
the (fiscal year)2015 funding levels,” according to the budget proposal
summary. “The Department of Energy is developing alternative approaches
to plutonium disposition and will engage with stakeholders to determine
a viable alternative. As a result, the MOX project will be placed in
cold standby while an alternative approach is determined.” The MOX plant – which is about 60 percent complete with a current
workforce of about 1,800 – would be the first of its kind in the U.S. to
create commercial nuclear fuel from weapons-grade plutonium and
represents an international nonproliferation effort.
Last year, the Government Accountability Office said that the project
was more than three years behind its 2016 completion deadline and that
construction costs were revised from $4.9 billion to $7.7 billion.
Resuming the program after a cold standby would require a significant
cost reduction, the NNSA said Tuesday in a media briefing. Other
options for plutonium disposition will be analyzed in the coming 12 to
18 months.
“What we mean by (cold standby) is that we would perform activities
associated with protecting the facility and equipment from elements and
ensuring they are maintained,” said Anne Harrington, the deputy
administrator for Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.
“We will protect the investment should the project be restarted or used for something different,” Harrington said.
Construction began on the 600,000-square-foot facility in 2007.
U.S. Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said Tuesday that the
administration was committed to the 2000 U.S.-Russia agreement to
dispose of 68 metric tons of surplus plutonium but that MOX costs had
spiraled out of control.
“We have a task force that’s been working at this very hard for the
past nine months. They are continuing to work with contractors to see if
we can get a substantial cost reduction,” Moniz said.
Of the $1.6 billion proposed for the NNSA’s nonproliferation efforts
in the president’s budget, $221 million was allotted to shutter the MOX
facility. Cuts to MOX represented more than half of nonproliferation’s
20 percent funding reduction, Moniz said.
MOX construction received $452.7 million in fiscal 2012, $487.7
million under a 2013 continuing resolution and $343.5 million in the
spending bill passed in January.
Tom Clements, a critic of the MOX project and an adviser for the
South Carolina chapter of the Sierra Club, said the proposal was
overdue.
“We have long called on DOE to abandon the mismanaged MOX project and
implement viable disposition alternatives, and this request finally
gets DOE on the right track,” Clements said. Some South Carolina lawmakers who have long backed the MOX project blasted the Obama administration for cutting its funding.
“(The president’s) decision to dramatically reduce funding for the
MOX program, to a point that raises serious questions about its
viability, represents a fundamental breach of trust with the residents
of South Carolina,” said U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican.
Republican Rep. Joe Wilson said escalating tensions between Ukraine and Russia underscore the need for nuclear nonproliferation.
“The president is failing to uphold vital nonproliferation agreements
and ongoing environment cleanup missions by essentially terminating MOX
at the Savannah River Site,” Wilson said. “This project plays an
integral role in honoring international agreements with Russia.”
MY FINAL COMMENT: But there is more. This is what the Augusta Chronicle is reporting this morning:
The contractor building the mixed-oxide fuel fabrication facility at
Savannah River Site said work continues as normal despite the National
Nuclear Security Administration announcing four weeks ago it would begin
shutting down the plant.
I saw this in a write up in an obituary--no mention of the person's faith or religion or who would preside at the graveside. I guess this pretty much sums it up, no?
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, martini in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming WOO HOO, what a ride! You had a great ride.
Archbishop Wilton Gregory may sell his yet to have been moved into $2.2 Mansion with 6000 square feet built for him alone as well as parties he might throw and guests he might have:
Archbishop Wilton Gregory quotes part of one of the many, many letters of complaint that he received: “We are disturbed and disappointed to see our church leaders not setting the example of a simple life as Pope Francis calls for. How can we instill this in our children when they see their archdiocesan leadership living extravagantly? We ask you to rethink these decisions and understand the role model the clergy must serve so the youth of our society can answer Jesus’ call. Neither our 18- or 14-year-old sons understand the message you are portraying.”
Archbishop Gregory also observes what he failed to observe:
Even before the phenomenon we have come to know as Pope Francis was elected to the Chair of Peter, we Bishops of the Church were reminded by our own failings and frailty that we are called to live more simply, more humbly, and more like Jesus Christ who challenges us to be in the world and not of the world. The example of the Holy Father, and the way people of every sector of our society have responded to his message of gentle joy and compassion without pretense, has set the bar for every Catholic and even for many who don’t share our communion. Then he writes: If it is the will of these trusted representative groups, the Archdiocese will begin the process of selling the Habersham residence. I would look to purchase or rent something appropriate elsewhere.
MY COMMENTS:With Pope Francis penitential, sober and austere papacy, I am reminded of the bishop who ordained me, who became one of the youngest bishops in our country when he was assigned to the Diocese of Savannah in 1974, Bishop Raymond W. Lessard. He retired in 1995 and then went to work as a professor at St. Vincent de Paul Seminary in Boynton Beach, Florida, where now in his 80's he continues to serve there.
He truly lived a simple life, only had one (what I thought was ugly even at the time) modern, short miter, a very simple wooden crozier and would only wear cheap, lightweight vestments. He did wear the various apparel of the bishop in terms of the house and formal cassock and aureola.
He lived in two large rooms of the second floor of the Cathedral rectory but had a getaway in a small bungalow at Tybee Island which had a connected but separate spacious room and bathroom for priests to use.
When the diocese was given a rather beautiful home on the Isle of Hope, which had to be moved from its original land to a very expensive piece of property owned for decades by the diocese as a summer camp, before it became an exclusive piece of real estate, worth multi-millions of dollars now, he was offered to keep it has his retirement home overlooking the Bull River and a spectacular view of the Savannah marshes.
He chose rather to give it to the new bishop and have a much smaller, sober three bedroom ranch house across from the main gate of "Camp Villa Marie" on a dirt road there, with no water or marsh views.
He was ahead of his time or his time in the past is the way "back to the future."
(Vatican Radio, April 1st, 2014) The Holy Father also said that he is ordering his gang of eight cardinals to study the issue of ordination of women as deacons, priests and bishops in light of his new rubric for Maundy Thursday and in light of religious and secular trends concerning the gender neutrality of Holy Orders and that brides and grooms can be of any sex or gender or none at all. He is especially interested in the transgendered priesthood.
Asked about how sanitary it would be to wash the feet of everyone at the Maundy Thursday Mass, the Holy Father said that the smell of feet is like the smell of sheep and if everyone smelled like feet what a better Church we would be.
The Holy Father also recommended that everyone walk to the Maundy Thursday Mass in flip flops or wide open sandals trying explicitly to get their feet as dirty as possible on the way so that an actual washing takes place.
.JPG)
