Corruption of morals.

No one can remain decent in a culture that has become obscene.

All the scandals of today reveal a complete corruption of morals.  Corruption is something Pope Francis continually speaks about and points out.  Today he called it the 'smog of corruption' which pollutes society.

With the clergy scandal the smog began to clear, just enough to see the 'filth' in the Church - perhaps this is what Blessed Paul VI meant when he spoke of the 'smoke of Satan'?  It certainly couldn't have been a liturgical reference, since the liturgy, the Eucharist is the heart of the Church, the source and summit of the life of the Church, it is sacred and inviolable... there is only one, holy Mass, albeit two forms in the Latin rite.

That said, first the judgment and chastisement exposed the corruption in the Church - in a sense, now it comes upon the world - culture/society.  I may be wrong, but it seems to me this is what is happening now, the corruption is being revealed.  People deny it - like those busily defending perpetrators such as Weinstein, Spacey, Roy Moore ... and before them, Trump.  What seems so strange is that they all look so normal.  Especially those defending politicians.  Few will defend Weinstein and Spacey, but many are willing to pick their accusers apart, seeking to discredit them or blame them - or just shame them.  In a sense, that is part of what I mean when I point out that no one can remain decent in a culture that has become obscene.

Rotting on the inside.

I'm thinking the least defensible actors in all of this are those who are most vocal in dismissing allegations against those they support politically.  This is corruption.  This is hypocrisy unmasked.  The toleration of lies and deceitful propaganda to promote a political agenda.  We saw it when every Trump supporter defended him against sexual harassment allegations.  Now Roy Moore is getting the same sort of treatment.   Alabama State Representative Ed Henry has suggested the accusers should be jailed.  Blaming and shaming is one reason victims do not come forward.  Edging on complete blasphemy, State Auditor Zeigler  defended Moore with an obscene reference to the Holy Family.  It's an outrageous statement coming from a Christian.  A respectable Christian politician.

Who can be surprised when figures in the entertainment industry are charged with sexual misconduct and corruption?  Be it male on male on female on young people on children?  Throughout history, actors, musicians and entertainers were always considered more or less immoral, it is only in our day that we have placed them upon pedestals and hold them in high esteem or treat them like royalty.  The same goes for professional sports and athletes - although a bit less so.  Every aspect of culture is corrupt:  The worthless are prized highly by the sons of men. (Psalm 12: 9)  It seems to me to be a form of propaganda, to deceive the public, already seduced by obscenity.

I sense it even among Catholic critics of the Pope, the Church and the liturgy.  They can look and sound so normal.  Something is wrong with them however, something is off.  Their rhetoric is just as obscene, just as deceptive.  They are anti-Catholic even though they claim to be more Catholic than the Pope.  They seem to me to be caught in the same smog of corruption, disoriented by the fog, the smoke of Satan.

I'll leave it at that, closing with what the Holy Father said today:

Speaking about what he described as the “smog of corruption” that pollutes society, the Holy Father also urged for prayers for the corrupt so that they “find a way out of the prison in which they wanted to enter.” - P. Francis

One more thought I like to point out to religious people, not all the residents of Sodom were gay.  

Inmates running the asylum.

I just discovered he does videos.  

Brothers and sisters: You are God's building.

I have chosen and consecrated this house, says the Lord, that my name may be there forever.


Shortly after my conversion and return to the sacraments I had a dream of angels constructing a church - Fra Angelico style angels - busy placing stone upon stone to frame a Romanesque window.  I knew it was a reflection of my soul.  I knew it was a literal interpretation of today's readings for the Feast of the Dedication of the Lateran Basilica.

Very early on, I was given the prayer of recollection.  So no matter what happens in the world, in the Church, I know what St. Paul said in his Leter to the Romans:

Do you not know that you are the temple of God,and that the Spirit of God dwells in you?

Yes! 

I gotta get going around here!

Prayers in reparation for the Texas church shooting.

-source-

Prayers for the victims and the survivors.

I have no comment.

I don't have to comment on everything.

Mass shootings since Sandy Hook.

Yet I'm writing this.

So anyway, on the latest shooting in Texas.  I have nothing pious to say.  It isn't apathy, or is it?  I'm not sure.  The thing is, the shooting follows closely upon the heels of the Vegas massacre. You know, the strange, single shooter armed with an arsenal of assault rifles who scored the largest mass shooting in U.S. history prize.   He was a nice guy, never harmed anyone, minded his own business, he just liked to gamble and he loved guns.  When you stockpile weapons, at some point you have to do something - like go on a big hunt.

On the other hand, the guy in Texas was an abuser and a bully, an angry, hateful man - who beats animals and little kids.  A bully.  Yet the guy in Vegas just liked to shoot. 

Guys love their guns - they want their guns, and they use them to score, to get even, and when necessary - to triumph over their enemies and those who are weaker and more vulnerable.  This country awards these guys with tons of news coverage, exploiting the shock and awe, until the audience gets bored with that.  Yet they are always guaranteed a place in the NRA Hall of Infamy.  They live on forever as the most notable shooters in history.

Anyway - you aren't supposed to talk about it.  That's why politicians insist up thoughts and prayers immediately after an event, cultivating the shock and awe and redirecting all the focus upon the sadness and consolation that can only come from God ...

Don't mention gun control - don't even think about it.   

This is interesting.

Medieval illumination, Circumcision of Abraham.

I have to get busy stocking my Etsy shop and painting and yard clean up...

Pontifical Mass at the Throne... a photo album ... kind of.

The throne or cathedra.

The full Pontifical High Mass is carried out when the bishop celebrates the Mass at the throne (or cathedra) in his own cathedral church, or with permission at the throne in another diocese. - Wiki

It takes a village.

Sometimes it seems people who love great pomp and extravagance especially love a Mass at the Throne because of it's drama.  It is very rich in symbolism and vestment, as well as ceremony.  Personally, I'm more attracted to a simple 'low' Mass,  very quiet and prayerful.  Often when I see notices for a Mass at the Throne to be celebrated here or there, it strikes me in the same way as an ad for the symphony or opera would - an invitation to a performance.  It involves a large number of clerics and servers for the celebration, which is why I stole the term, 'it takes a village'.  Indeed it does, which explains the notices and invitations (beyond a parish or diocesan boundaries) to attend.  I have no doubt quietly assisting, or hearing and watching the elaborate ceremonies and solemn choreography can be a contemplative, prayerful experience, but I'm fine with the Ordinary Form of Mass, and/or, the simple Low Mass.

Buskins*

Ceremonial stockings of silk, sometimes interwoven with gold threads, and even heavily embroidered, worn by the celebrant of a pontifical Mass. Originally worn by priests, they were reserved about the eighth century for the exclusive use of bishops, a privilege recently extended to lesser prelates. In colour they correspond to the chasuble, but are never worn with black. - NLM

Things difficult wear w/out assistance.

This could be where the phrase "four sheets to the wind" came from?

Church floors can be dirty.

Grand entrance.

It can be very cold in European cathedrals.

All vested at the throne.

Incensed.

Incensing.

The source and summit, the Eucharist.

De-vesting?

Recessional.

+ + +

I love a simple Low Mass.

+ + +

*Buskins can be worn by laymen now as well.

What?

If you are concerned about gaining a plenary Indulgence ...

But don't want to pray for the Pope or his intentions ...

Fr. Z tackles the question here:

ASK FATHER: How to “pray for the Pope’s intentions” if I don’t like them or him?

Yeah.  Read his response there.

I'm no expert, but I wouldn't worry too much about gaining any sort of indulgence with that attitude.  It seems to me the proper disposition to receive a plenary indulgence maybe more or less lacking if a person is governed by such animosity.  I may be wrong of course, and only God knows the soul.

I just think charity should be the guide here.  You don't have to like someone to pray for them - in fact we are told to pray for our enemies - not that the Successor of Peter is our enemy.  The counsel that one doesn't pray for the person of the Pope but for his intentions seems to me to be much broader than limiting one's prayer to those intentions the Holy Father designates.  As Fr. Z makes clear at the end of his response, there are traditional general intentions, which he lists:

1. Exaltatio S. Matris Ecclesiae (Triumph/elevation/stablity/growth of Holy Mother Church)
2. Extirpatio haeresum (Extirpation/rooting out of heresies),
3. Propagatio fidei (Propagation/expansion/spreading of the Faith)
4. Conversio peccatorum (Conversion of sinners),
5. Pax inter principes christianos (Peace between christian rulers).

 Fr. Z also mentions praying for those intentions the Pope designates in accord with God's will.  For a Catholic, one would expect that to be a given, the proper disposition necessary.  One doesn't have to know the intentions of the Vicar of Christ to pray for him or his intentions.  Praying for the head of the Church is prayer for the Church - it is our duty, it is God's will.

Something is off with that sort of miserly attitude towards the Pope.  I don't get it.  Jesus taught us how to pray, and we pray for the coming of the Kingdom, and that the Father's will be done.  It seems to me the Holy Father's intentions are necessarily summarized in that prayer.

Anyone devoted to Our Lady would know that she has asked those who pray the Rosary to pray for the Pope - she never said 'pray for his intentions' - she asked the children at Fatima to pray for the Holy Father.  She did not differentiate.  Just saying.

Friar Weinandy

A Friar's Letter to His Lordship the Pope.

When I first skimmed the letter I thought it was a humble, thoughtful, respectful petition, which echoed, more or less, many of the concerns Catholics online post and comment on in com-boxes.  I thought to myself, someone reasonable has written a good letter to the Pope.  I initially hoped the Holy Father might respond in kind.  Then I read it more closely, as well as some honest criticism of the piece, and discovered otherwise.  Now I'm not sure if the Holy Father needs to respond.  Some say the letter is a letter of dissent and calumny.  I have no response to that except to say, I'm less confused by the Holy Father than I am by his critics and detractors and the gossip.  That said, it looks as if Fr. Weinandy writes from that perspective.

Msgr. John Strynkowski, former executive director of the Secretariat for Christian Doctrine at the U.S.C.C.B. responded to Fr. Weinandy's letter.  He does a good job addressing the problems with it, beginning first with a reference to Sandro Magister's introduction to Fr. Weinandy's letter.

I am writing this open letter to you in response to your open letter to Pope Francis in which you address what you describe as a “chronic confusion” that seems to mark his pontificate. 

According to Sandro Magister’s introduction to your letter, you had asked Jesus for a sign as to whether you should write your letter, you received that sign and thus “no longer had any doubt that Jesus wanted me to write….” I cannot enter into the subjective conditions that inspired you to write, but I need to note that “Amoris Laetitia,”toward which you express great concern, was the fruit of two synods and broad consultation throughout the church, is widely recognized as an act of ordinary Magisterium, and thus enjoys presumption as having been guided by the Spirit of the Lord. - Finish reading here.

Online you will hear and read criticism of the USCCB because Fr. Weinandy was asked to resign* after his letter was made public.  Don't fall for it.  The letter should have remained private as made clear in Donum Veritatis, which Monsignor cites at the end of his crituque:

"Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, urged that dissent from ordinary Magisterium should be disclosed privately to church authority—see “Donum Veritatis” (No. 30). In a world and even an ecclesial environment of sound bites and facile partisanship, that becomes even wiser advice." - ibid

Anyway, be careful of falling for this form of propaganda.  Not Fr. W's letter per se, but its public release and the editorializing which accompanies it.  This feeds the appetite of those who wish to discredit the Magisterium and contributes to the spread of more doubt and confusion, leading to greater division in the Church.  That's just how I see it - it doesn't matter what I think.


*In a statement released Wednesday afternoon, James Rogers, chief communications officer of the bishops’ conference, said that, “after speaking with the general secretary of the conference today, Father Thomas Weinandy, OFM, Cap., has resigned, effective immediately, from his position as consultant to the USCCB Committee on Doctrine. The work of the committee is done in support of, and in affective collegiality with, the Holy Father and the Church in the United States. Our prayers go with Father Weinandy as his service to the committee comes to a close.” - NCRegister

All Souls

-source-

De profundis clamavi ad te, Domine; Domine, exaudi vocem meam.
Fiant aures tuæ intendentes in vocem deprecationis meæ.
Si iniquitates observaveris, Domine, Domine, quis sustinebit?
Quia apud te propitiatio est; et propter legem tuam sustinui te, Domine.
Sustinuit anima mea in verbo ejus: speravit anima mea in Domino.
A custodia matutina usque ad noctem, speret Israël in Domino.
Quia apud Dominum misericordia, et copiosa apud eum redemptio. 

Et ipse redimet Israël ex omnibus iniquitatibus ejus.

Purgatory

I like the idea of Purgatory.

The Pope believes in it too.

Don't listen to those who say he doesn't.

As I examine my conscience and look over my life, I see how necessary purgatory is.  It is certainly nothing to fear, since the soul knows he is saved and loved.  It seems to me the souls would desire this purgation with great love.  I don't know.

I pray for the souls in purgatory nonetheless, since the Church asks us to do so, that no one may suffer alone or without compassion.

500th Anniversary of the Reformation

Just some thoughts.

High church Lutherans look and celebrate the Eucharist just like Catholics do.  Or, the liturgical reforms of Vatican II conform to the high church celebrations of Lutherans and Anglicans.  Sadly, some Catholic churches look more Protestant than the Protestants.

I don't like that.

I never liked Lutheranism, high or low.  My dad was Lutheran and his mother was a die hard anti-Catholic, so I grew up with a lot of tension and a lot of hostility.  My Lutheran cousins told me I was going to hell because I 'worshiped' idols, while my Catholic cousins told me my dad was going to hell because he was Lutheran.  Since I was devout as a kid, I got it from all sides.  I also never liked the interiors of Protestant churches because they lacked images and did not have the Blessed Sacrament - which they didn't believe in.  So I couldn't imagine why they even went to church.

As an adult, I grew more optimistic about Protestants, yet never felt inclined to Ecumenical Services, much less attend their Eucharist.  That said, I was always hopeful high church groups could easily unite with Rome - especially to receive Christ in the Eucharist.  Yep, I know their understanding of the Eucharist is different - and apparently today some Catholics adopt the Protestant understanding as well - but I'm against it.

So.  I don't get the rehabilitation of Luther, or reconciling the upheaval caused by the Reformation, or, as some suggest, the Holy Spirit guided Luther.  I have no attraction to that kind of ecumenism.

It also saddens me that the Catholic Church has become so Protestant after Vatican II, in some cases, bringing to completion what the Protestant reformers began 500 years ago: Whitewashing churches, removing the Blessed Sacrament, turning altars around, and so on.  Likewise, the loss of vocations, priests leaving to get married, nuns secularizing, and so on - everything that happened 500 years ago.

No wonder younger people are so attracted to Traditional Catholicism and the Extraordinary Form of Mass.

Just my opinion - it doesn't change anything.

Happy Halloween.

I knew there was a reason I hated Halloween.

Online petition to remove Bishop Morlino.

Botero

I'm against it.

Madison (WKOW) -- There's an online petition being circulated to remove the Bishop of the Diocese of Madison.

Bishop Robert Morlino is being criticized for his attitude about the LGTBQ community. Earlier this week, an email was sent to priests in the diocese saying that they could deny funeral rights for those in same-sex partnerships.

The diocese released a statement that said the communication is not official policy, but does meet the approval of Bishop Morlino.

The petition was posted on change.org Thursday and has thousands of signatures. - Read more here.

It turns out it isn't even official policy.  

So why was the email sent out and why did it go viral?  Why did I waste my time commenting on it? (I know - why do I do that stuff?)  Why did some people leave the Church over a non-binding policy communicated by the Vicar General to parish priests in an email - not even an official communication?  Why start this kind of trouble in the first place?  Are there a lot of gay spouses looking for church funerals in Madison?

The communication, which took the form of a weekly e-mail to priests from the Vicar General of the diocese, was a result of pastoral questions asked by the priests themselves, and was to serve as a tool to provide some framework and considerations, in this confidential setting. Without a policy, and as the communication itself states, the priests are asked to “think through the issue thoroughly and prudently,” and this was a response to those who asked for assistance in their task – as well as other priests who might have similar situations and questions. - Brent M. King, Director of Communications for the Diocese of Madison

Nothing better to do I guess.  Or maybe they felt they needed to issue a call to arms against hysterical homosexualists and their abettors clamoring for EF Requiems?  According to Fr. Z there is a Judas in the diocese ... maybe that's why?   Sounds like there is an informant in the diocese as well.  That's too bad.  I didn't realize that was part of 'say the black, do the red'.  Just kidding.

Oh well, let the dead bury the dead.  It's none of my business.

What?

Worried about the end? Worried that Pope Francis has abolished the places where souls were supposed to go after death: hell, purgatory, heaven?

Let the dead bury their dead.

Does Francis believe in universal salvation?

Sandro Magister seems to think so, and picks up on what Francis omits in his homilies to prove it.  'They' are all out 'to test him' and sift his homilies for heresy and error.  Magister also seems to think Eugenio Scalfari of 'la Repubblica' is an accurate source for what the Holy Father actually believes, claiming Francis has changed Catholic teaching on the 'end things' - eliminating purgatory and hell, suggesting the damned will simply cease to exist.  Why would anyone believe the Pope said that or even thinks that?

Yet people do.  Magister sifts through recent homilies and papal addresses to find evidence.  He believes since the Holy Father leaves off references to judgment and punishment in a homily, instead emphasizing the mercy of God, he somehow denies the existence of hell.  It's quite a stretch, really.  Especially for a Pope most noted for his many references to the Devil and the dangers posed by the diabolical.  He calls gender theory diabolical, as well as same sex marriage.  He cautions Catholics to frequent the sacraments - to examine their consciences and to go to confession.  He urges priests to be available for confession.  For someone supposedly not believing in hell, why bother?  So you see, it's fake news, detraction bordering on calumny.

At best, it is a misrepresentation of what the Pope may have actually said, taking into consideration Scalfari is an atheist and spins things in the manner he perceives them. As for Francis leaving out parts of the Gospel in his homilies - we all know they are still there - so his emphasis seems to me to be upon mercy until our dying breath, confidence and love - and hope. So?  For me it echoes the intimations of St. Therese who once said 'little children cannot be damned.'  She wasn't contradicting Catholic teaching, since she already understood the disposition of a 'little child' who surrenders with complete trust and love to the merciful love of God.

I don't believe what Magister is trying to convince us of. The Pope believes in the last things, as I pointed out earlier, if he did not, why would he always warn us against the devil?   Anyway - I'm not an expert, to be sure.  Yet I'm well aware both Pope Benedict XVI and St. John Paul experienced similar criticism and suspicion when they spoke of purgatory and limbo of not being a place as we think of things, but rather a 'state of being', or something like that.  While still a Cardinal, Benedict even speculated that limbo was "only a theological concept" and "never a defined truth of faith."

The Holy Father seems to have a very deep understanding of the passion, the sufferings of Christ and him crucified - which is really the image of the Father's love, the very love of God. At the moment of death Christ surrendered himself into the Fathers hands.  At his very last breath - justice and peace kissed, mercy and truth embraced.

Therefore, as the Holy Father stated, "judgment is not to be feared, because “at the end of our history there is the merciful Jesus,” and therefore “everything will be saved. Everything."  How can that be?  Again, I think of Therese who said: 'We can never have too much confidence in the Good God, He is so mighty, so merciful. As we hope in Him so shall we receive.'  Little Therese understood the happiness of the blessed and rejoiced even in God's justice, explaining to Mother Agnes of Jesus:

St. Therese of Lisieux "expected as much from God's justice as she did from his mercy. 'How nice it is to think that God is just!' she said. 'It means he takes our weakness into account and knows full well how frail we are by nature.'" - Mother Agnes of Jesus

I like to think this is the same vision Pope Francis has, and he shares it with his patroness.  I think of Julian of Norwich who said, "All will be well".  We know the saints in heaven rejoice in God's justice, even though they have knowledge of the souls of the damned, even knowing loved ones may be among them.  Mercy and truth have embraced.  God is love, all the blessed are steeped in charity, united in this love, adoring all of God's perfections and rejoicing - in Everything - even his Justice.

Why would anyone assume the Holy Father is denying the Justice of God when he exhorts us to plunge ourselves with confidence into the Mercy of God?  It seems to me those who know theology and Catholic doctrine, the learned and wise, surely understand this better than I do.

"Even if I had committed all possible crimes, I would still have the same confidence; I would feel that this multitude of offenses would be like a drop of water thrown into the flaming furnace of God's love." - St. Therese

I am equally convinced the Holy Father speaks in the same sense as Our Lady when she declared, "In the end, my Immaculate Heart will triumph."

Of course I could be wrong.  I don't know what the Holy Father thinks, but I certainly would never interpret what he says as contrary to faith or morals or contradicting doctrine.

"On the way to perdition?"

What?

Let the dead bury their dead - you follow Me.

Credit: DEA / G. DAGLI ORTI De Agostini Picture Library Getty Images

"You who pass by ..." - 1 Lamentation 1:12


There was some debate on Facebook concerning the recent news from the Madison Diocese, reiterating guidelines for Christian Burial when it involves manifest public sinners.  People who read this blog know what that's all about, if you don't, not to worry - it doesn't affect you.  I wrote about it this past week and readers know I'm fine with it.

That said, a Catholic man online was distressed by the instruction.  Other gay Catholics felt singled out as well.  The man I'm thinking of chose another church to attend because he felt alienated as a gay man.  One of his readers responded with a comment saying, 'They hate us.'  In other words, she was saying the Church hates gay people.  We all know that is the perception.  We all know that people who speak out against that notion, that impression, are frequently labeled 'homosexualists' and the response to them is hostile because they're perceived as hostile to Catholic teaching, and all that stuff.

The scorn and derision shown to those people who have difficulty understanding Catholic teaching, by some priests and laity, is very hurtful.  Especially for people who have struggled with issues of sexuality, identity, and friendship for much of their life.  We are all wounded people - straight or gay.  I grew up in a rather abusive family so I learned early on not to expect much from others, and to be grateful for small kindnesses.  Not everyone is able to do that.  Especially people who have expected some form of understanding and sympathy as they struggle to accept and assimilate Catholic teaching in the face of outright contempt.

I may be wrong, but I think the insensitivity of some clergy, not to mention their vindictive, sometimes hostile defense of Catholic teaching - in your face correction - is far from the Catholic standard of 'truth in charity'. 

If we are indeed out to save souls, we ought to endure patiently and kindly with the opposition of those we deem 'manifest sinners' - Christ did that.

Psalm 132 comes to mind, 'Remember David and all the hardships he endured ...'  which reminds me of how the king took no offense at the curses uttered by Shimei, and told his guards to leave him alone and let him curse. 

So why do we attack those who are already hurt?  Some may be more damaged than we can know.

How is the Christian supposed to treat his enemies? 

The Good Samaritan made sure the man left for dead was treated with kindness and care, with great  dignity.

What's the deal with Catholics claiming other Catholics are out for the blood of Cardinal Sarah?

I've just about had it.  What?

What's with all the ideological rhetoric?  Like Fr. Z calling these people the Red Menace?

He keeps posting about the 'New catholic Red Guard'.

Fr. Z is into branding - that's most likely because he can market it on mugs and bumper stickers.  It's amazing how his entrepreneurial ambition sometimes just adds to the craziness and confusion of Catholic information online.  Some days it is difficult to sort through the nutcases online when Fr. Z chimes in with this stuff.  He can come off just as much a crackpot as an Ann Barnhardt for instance, or even Skojec at 1P5 and a few others who make the headlines at Canon 212 - maybe add in Raymundo Arroyo and his World-Over-Celebrity-Interview-Showcase onto that list as well. 

When Fr. Z starts trumpeting this type of click-bait, he once again demonstrates why it is highly unlikely he will ever be named a 'domestic prelate'.  It may even indicate a serious lack of balance - a problem which certainly seems obvious with Barnhardt and Skojec. 

The 'New catholic Red Guard' - indeed.  Benedict and Sarah 'haters'.  Really?  C'mon.  Call out errors in teaching and dogma but stop with the mixed metaphor editorializing - it just adds to the confusion.

You are making things worse instead of better.

You call someone a Nazi 

and they turn around and call you

a Communist.  Where are the Catholics?

I thought this was about faith and morals?

What's ideology got to do with it?

Don't let this squeak by with little attention: Catholic psychiatric hospitals in Belgium grant euthanasia to non-terminal patients.

Spiritual accompaniment for euthanasia?

This is a very troubling development. The Catholic Hospital Group under aegis of the Brothers of Charity has defied the Pope and is permitting euthanasia.  Unbelievably, it is my understanding the hospitals have provided a 'spiritual guide' and chaplain support to 'accompany' the patients.  This is deeply disturbing on so many levels. Especially since the eugenic policies of Nazi Germany remain in living memory. It all began with the elderly, the disabled and mentally ill. Forced euthanasia, coerced euthanasia, now morphs into 'spiritual accompaniment euthanasia'. There is a serious problem with the Church in Belgium.

VATICAN CITY—A chain of Catholic psychiatric hospitals in Belgium is granting euthanasia to non-terminal patients, defying the Vatican and deepening a challenge to the church’s commitment to a constant moral code. - WSJ

To 'Bury the Dead' is a Corporal Act of Mercy

Therefore some people are confused by a funeral policy reiterated by the Diocese of Madison.

The policy issued is simply an affirmation of Catholic teaching.  There must be a pastoral concern which the diocese is addressing.  It is the responsibility of the Bishop to make clear Catholic teaching on faith and morals.  Just as in the case of Bishop Paprocki, the diocese felt it necessary to clarify polices concerning Christian burial.  Nothing wrong with that.

Same-sex marriage obviously is presenting a new difficulty these days.  Dr. Peters summarizes it on his blog.

[P]ersons who enter “same-sex marriage” plainly manifest their opposition to crucial and infallible Church teaching that restricts marriage to one man and one woman. The positions taken bySpringfield IL Bp. Paprocki and by the Diocese of Madison restricting funerals in such cases and outlining possible exceptions to those restrictions are thoroughly consistent with the canon law of the Catholic Church. - Dr. Peters

I'm surprised that gay Catholics take offense to that.  It seems cold, but Catholics should understand these things if they are catechized properly.  The sacraments are never refused to the dying, even manifest sinners - those living in 'public' sin.  Civil marriage is public - as is sacramental marriage, which is why the Church announces Banns of Marriage - the public announcement of a couple's intent to marry in the Church.  Catholics know very well same-sex marriage is not, nor cannot be recognized by the Church, and homosexual acts can in no way be approved.  If you are in such a situation and do not renounce it - or have the intention to repent, or hopefully confess before death, you are pretty much in opposition to Catholic doctrine.  If and when this situation is 'publicly manifest'  the Rite of Christian Burial can be denied.

It doesn't mean the deceased can't have a funeral or have prayers said, or even have Masses said.  But a funeral Mass can be denied.  That said, in many 'private' situations I'm sure a funeral Mass and a priest at the graveside occurs.  Not all bishops and priests enforce the rules, so to speak.  Which is why I say the Diocese of Madison may have been informed of an abuse and therefore found it necessary to reiterate and specify Catholic teaching in this regard.  In these cases, a Catholic priest-chaplain at the hospital, or the local parish is usually available to personally advise and help the dying person and family.

No priest or bishop, no matter how traditional or 'by the rubrics' would ever refuse the sacraments to the dying, or seek to 'punish' the person, his/her partner or family, by denying a public funeral on a whim.  One needs to take into consideration there may be a genuine problem of scandal - and I'm not talking 'pearl-clutching'.  Grave scandal and its effects upon the people of God must be taken into serious consideration.  In some cases, a denial of burial to a public figure is avoided because that situation can also scandalize many - it is the duty and office of the local ordinary to make that call. 

Bishop Paprocki and now Bishop Morlino are strongly criticized for simply reiterating Catholic teaching.  That is wrong.  They are being painted as homophobic and uncharitable.  That is not what this is about.

Gay Catholics, no matter how you identify, you need to know that same sex marriage is in no way equal to sacramental marriage between a man and a woman.  We all need to repent and believe in the Gospel - we are told that at the beginning of Lent, when ashes are imposed upon our foreheads - it's not decorative, much less a cosmetic enhancement.  It's about death and eternal life.  We need to prepare ourselves for that.  Just saying.

Rather than bitch and complain, or carry on some sort of online war, both sides should maybe worry more about how to make Catholic teaching more palatable, help people understand the truth - in actual charity, kindly, sensitively and patiently.  To 'bury the dead' is a corporate act of mercy, therefore console the grieving, offer suffrages, do what Catholics have always done.

This is perennial Roman Catholic teaching.  When Catholic teaching is challenged and or publicly opposed, it needs clarification from the Church.  Bishop Morlino and the Diocese of Madison has done that, and he needs Catholics to support him in that.

If this stuff hurts, pray.  Pray some more.  Go to Confession.  Pray.  Let yourself be taught.  Love correction.  As the Psalmist said, "If a good man reproves me, it is kindness."  Pray deeply.  Stay a long time after Communion and pray.  God loves us indiscriminately, especially when we are too little to understand.

Fake comment from Bl. Paul VI

I searched to find the speech or address of Paul VI containing the following quote now circulating online:

“The tail of the Devil is functioning in the disintegration of the Catholic world. The darkness of Satan has entered and spread throughout the Catholic Church, even to its summit. Apostasy, the loss of the Faith, is spreading throughout the world and into the highest levels within the Church”. - Attributed to Paul VI

Paul VI supposedly said that in a speech on October 13, 1977.   Interestingly enough, many trads and Fatima people pretty much dismiss Paul VI for everything else, yet they are grabbing onto this quote, which fits well into their narrative that Pope Francis undermines Catholic teaching and 'Francis-bishops' are apostates.  I think a couple of prelates may even ascribe to this theory and call for a re-consecration of Russia.  You know.

As one comment on Fr. Z's post highlighting the "Pauline' quote noted:  

I have heard this quote as well as the now-famous 1976 Cardinal Wojtyla comment from America (about the battle between Church and Anti-Church). 

Both quotes can be traced, apparently, to newspaper articles, but no one, as far as I know, has ever found the originals. 

In fact, I have looked for the supposed 10/13/77 speech on the Vatican website; not there. I also read Wojtyla’s speech in American in 1976; not there. 

The Paul VI “smoke of satan” is authentic, although it is found in a summary of a homily he gave; found on the Vatican Website. - Source

 I did the same search and had the same results.  The address of Pope Paul on 10-13-77 was to the German Bishops in Latin, and despite my limited knowledge of Latin, I saw nothing of the quote there.

The Hidden Surprise In the Fatima Secret

Soviet Women's Equality.

“The decisive battle between the Lord and the kingdom of Satan will be over marriage and the family.” Sr. Lucia dos Santos.


The Fatima surprise ... the Devil's final battle - over marriage and the family. Some Catholics seem surprised about that. Especially because Fatimists believed it was all about the Great Apostasy - even at the top - as Fr. Kramer's book asserted nearly two decades ago:

Fr Kramer's expose of the "great crime...committed against the Catholic Church and the world at large" by the refusal to consecrate Russia to the Immaculate Heart OF Mary while knowingly and willfully suppressing the Third Secret of Fatima is grimly methodical. Fr Kramer cast his book in the form of a legal indictment outlining the crime, the evidence for the crime,naming the suspected perpetrators of the crime, their motives, their defense of their actions, and the devastating consequences that have already resulted from their crime and will continue to intensify until the crime is undone. - Devil's Final Battle

When Cardinal Caffarra  made public what Sr. Lucia told him about the real final battle, Catholics jumped on that to indict the Pope and Amoris laetitia as somehow part of Satan's battle plan.  Maybe it is?  I don't know.  The Devil has to delight in the division within the Church and the attacks upon the papacy and magisterium, but I wonder how this 'decisive battle' message is such a surprise for so many.  Where have they been?  The only new development in the area of marriage is the opening to Same Sex unions and families.  It's a big development - but essentially - at least on the surface, gay people simply want the option to domesticate and have a family.  Laying aside religious resistance, and God willing, religious liberties are not violated, civil unions are late to the 'final battle'.  (However, that's not the focus of my discussion here.)

Americans welcomed the errors of Russia.

What I'm getting at is that to understand what Lucia said about the 'final battle' warning can best be understood if we go back to what Our Lady said at Fatima in the first place: "Russia will spread her errors ..."  Therefore, it's necessary to take a look at those errors, specifically how the Soviets sought to destroy marriage and control the family, and how this form of 'family planning' was popularized in the West, where it actually originated.  The 'errors of Russia' were 'domesticated' in and through  academia and the sciences, and popularized by the entertainment industry. 

So why is this such a huge revelation for some Catholics today?

We've been living with these 'freedoms' for more that half a century.  No fault divorce, contraception, abortion, along with all of the effects of these things, have been tolerated, accepted and even affirmed by Americans for decades.  We consider them human rights.  Yet so many religious people look for new revelations and locutions to tell us what went wrong?  Or the same people accuse the Church of having failed to teach the truth?  That's diabolic delusion, if indeed you are looking for it - especially when you claim the Pope is teaching errors.

The Secret has already been revealed:  Russia spread her errors and Western economies flourished by them.

I found an interesting article from 1926 titled, "The Russian Effort to Abolish Marriage."  With all the talk of Russia trying to influence U.S. politics these days, it might be good to review how Russia spread her errors and influenced domestic policies in the United States for nearly 100 years.

Just saying, shaking my head.

Russian errors: Soviet tattoos.

Look around you.  

Look at how many Americans are now

covered in tattoos!  Even Catholics!

What?

The disastrous end to the Fatima Jubilee ...

Actually, this was today's Gospel.

I think seers and locutionists and those who decipher meaning in the alignment of stars and the signs in nature are pushing the Apocalypse back a bit.  Apparently they weren't really sure if it was going to happen this year or in 2020 - or even later.

Whatever.

Parish busybodies online.

Monday, Monday.

Every parish has a busybody, sometimes several, which is where we get the tradition of  'church ladies'.  They can be men, too.

Of course some will protest the title of busybody, but they are the same people online who usually complain they are ignored by chanceries or banned from St. Patrick's day parades.  They complain a lot.  They correct priests.  Hunt for scandals to uncover.  They inform on parishioners who may not be as holy as they are, and so on.  Of course they have their place in the life of the Church, but they are a minority in parishes and by extension, in the Church universal.

I came to that conclusion today after searching for a priest in the Archdiocese of NYC.  He's an excellent priest and he is assigned to St. Patrick's Cathedral in Manhattan.  So?  Think of it.  Church Militant, The Remnant, 1P5, a couple staff members from a seminary in Michigan, and a few other crack pot bloggers decry Cardinals, bishops, priests and religious in union with the Holy Father as 'wolves in sheep's clothing'.  They accuse them of misleading the flock, they call them the very worst names and accuse them of horrible - sometimes unspeakable sins.  For that reason they themselves will admit that they are banned from websites, and/or have become persona non grata at rectories and chanceries.  Yet St. Patrick's is a parish, a large parish in a larger archdiocese, served by many excellent and holy priests, with a Cardinal, albeit frequently attacked and criticized by a vociferous few.

They are an extremely small group.  They like to think they are THE remnant and more Catholic than the Pope.  When in fact, they are a parochial group of very vocal, angry, disgruntled, parish busybodies.  Now that they are on social media, they seem more numerous and influential than they are, but most Catholics never heard of them much less know who they are.

What?

Building a bridge ... the Holy Father.

Las Lajas Sanctuary Ipiales, Colombia

The Pope speaks.

“Don’t let your youth be stolen from you,” Pope Francis told the young people of Canada. 

“Don’t build walls of division. Build bridges, like this one which you are crossing and which allows you to communicate from the shores of two oceans." - P. Francis video message to Canadian youth.

Mass chat: The children's teeth are on edge.

The power of silence.

Pope Francis' correctio of Cardinal Sarah.

As Fr. Z might say - it's a dust up, not to worry.  Although it is sure to to become a big storm within the 'remnant'.  I picked up the story from Fr. Martin:

Breaking: In an extraordinary public correction, Pope Francis has corrected Cardinal Robert Sarah on a statement that Sarah recently made contradicting the Pope on the liturgy. 

In what Massimo Faggioli calls a "paternal correction," the Pope reaffirms that, as he said in his motu proprio, authority for liturgical translations rests with local bishops conferences. (Sarah, prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, had recently said that what the Pope said does not apply.) - Fr. Martin

Fr. Z points out it isn't really a correction of the Cardinal but a request for him to correct a “Commentaire”, wrongly attributed to the Cardinal.  The Holy Father concludes by recognizing the Cardinal for his good work (diligence) in bringing the matter to the Pope's attention and thanking him.

Works for me.

The Ordinary Form is Holy.

This weekend another priest from the seminary had Mass at my parish.  He's one of my favorite priests in the Archdiocese.  Wonderful guy.  His homily was 'firey' - all about the love of God and our rendering to God what is God's in and through Holy Mass.  I can tell this priest prays, and prays the Mass.  I won't say anything more on that however.

It is a scandal to me how Catholics not only malign the Holy Father, but denigrate the Mass as well.  Especially the Ordinary Form - which is the ordinary form for Holy Mass in the Latin rite.  Some even suggesting it is a diabolic deception.  So now, I am certain, they will say the Holy Father, in his correction of Cardinal Sarah is bent upon destruction of the Sacred Liturgy.  Their 'teeth are on edge'.

I came across a post from Michael Matt of The Remnant.  He is descendant from The Wanderer newspaper which has pretty much always been a stronghold of conservatism and resistance to the 'spirit of Vatican II'.  'They' were not wrong about that, but they were frequently without 'charity' in their 'resistance'.  Only recently has that segment turned hostile and vindictive, at times, resisting Peter to his face.  Readers know what I'm talking about here.  I think a 'correctio' for these groups would be fitting.

To see how far they have come in their resistance astonished me.  I knew individuals formed themselves on private revelations and spurious interpretations of apparitions and mystical writings such as those from Bl. Catherine Emmerich, but I didn't think they could be as literal about it as they seem to be.  I came upon the following from Michael Matt in an introduction to a post  suggesting Cardinal Burke as the 'new apologist for sedevacantists'.  (LOL!)  The criticism of the Ordinary Form of Mass is shameful, to say the least.

We were warned that these days were forthcoming. Well now they’ve arrived, and the question is: Are we up to the challenge to keep the faith in spite of them? For us it is important to recall that the forces of darkness have tried and failed to crush the Bride of Christ outright, and that out of that failure a new and even more diabolically clever strategy seems to be emerging—to leave the Church standing but to infiltrate her, as Pope Pius X predicted they’d do. “The work of the devil will infiltrate even into the Church,” predicted Our Lady of Akita, as well. And so gathered here behind enemy lines, in occupied territory, we’re up against Luciferian deception where there are no easy answers and no easy way out.

So rather than outlawing the Catholic Mass (as they did so often in history), for example, they "reformed" it this time. And their New Mass is a disastrous novelty that may nevertheless retain its technical validity—with Christ truly present to be reviled, ignored, effectively mocked on Novus tables just as He was on Calvary’s Cross. It may be tempting in the face of such devastating sacrilege to stand up and denounce all New Masses as “invalid”. But are they? Sacrilege does not guarantee invalidity, and to suggest that it does may well be to miss the more horrific point of what’s really going on here. (Nor does mere technical validity translate to mean that we have a moral right to expose ourselves or our children to something that has done so much documented damage throughout the world to the belief in the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist.) Retaining technical validity may well be Satan’s masterstroke, for if the abuse-ridden New Mass is invalid then only mere bread and wine are being ignored, abused, reviled or in some other way disrespected. Would the Father of Lies settle for that?  

And so too with the Pope—if only it were true that Francis is not the pope! But what if the diabolical nature of the crisis at hand is to be found in the very fact that he is, despite the myriad scandals? In the face of the growing scandal, it’s understandable that some want to proclaim Peter’s chair empty but, again, would the Father of Lies settle for that, or would he demand the real thing to hold up in triumph before the Face of Christ Crucified? In his pride, would Lucifer settle for some harlot imposter, propped up in the place of Christ’s spotless bride? These are the questions that must be discussed. And, of course, since diabolical disorientation impacts each and every one of us, we could certainly be wrong in how we see it all. But what is not up for debate is this: When we “defend” Pope Francis as a valid pope (as John Salza does in the following article) we are not defending his multitudinous scandals. In fact, it would be so much easier for us to simply announce he’s lost his office. But we believe that he has not, and that's the problem! - Michael Matt

Michael Matt is getting as strange as Ann Barnhardt.  They use 'Biblical prophetic' language and private revelation quite well to support their claims, but the Pope is the final authority. 

The Pope, Bishop of Rome and Peter's successor, "is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful." "For the Roman Pontiff, by reason of his office as Vicar of Christ, and as pastor of the entire Church has full, supreme, and universal power over the whole Church, a power which he can always exercise unhindered." - CCC 832

What if this is my very last post ...

Our Lady's Chapel

Icon of OLPH on copper

artist unknown.  

(The flash is from a too bright of a spot light.)

Some photos of the chapel where the icon of the Annunciation resides.  The icon is currently in the niche at the back of the chapel, as seen below.