New Mass Translation: All over but the shouting.

There will certainly be challenges with the new translation for everyone. For instance, “And with your spirit” is not idiomatic, nor is the word “consubstantial” familiar to most parishioners. But we all know what the real disagreements will be. There is an online petition asking the Bishops not to demand the use of the new translation, and in the comments you can see the points of contention.

There is, of course, the procedural argument: The change is being imposed from above and does not reflect the views of the laity because it was not produced by a democratic process. This is the constant tension over the hierarchy. But there is also a theological argument, a dispute over what the language is for. According to one South African Bishop, the very reason for the new translation was based, among other things, upon “a purely arbitrary decision to demand that the English text had to faithfully represent the Latin . . .” Well, quite.

Read more

The liberal’s godless (utopian) society: Frighteningly close to hell on earth.

There are places where real need is desperate, particularly in Africa, but the cause of hardship is not economic.  Rather, it is political.  Leaders cannot have their subjects affluent.  These wretches must, instead, be forced into corrals of poverty.  All the trillions of dollars of aid which America and Europe have given to these nations have not helped the poor.

Why would anyone want his own people poor?  Why do leftists here create phantasms like global warming and demand holy altars to worship dirt?  Why do they ignore the ghastly deconstruction of wholesome youth, which is the sole aim of state-controlled education and culture?  It has nothing to do with money or with markets or with any other aspect of conventional economics.

Read more

The critical difference between liberals and leftists

While many conservatives merge liberalism and leftism, there are huge differences between the two camps.  Liberals, like Gail, want a kinder and gentler America.  They choose safe, suburban suburbs, with schools that (as of yet) do not radicalize their children.  While it’s the rare liberal who would display a flag on July 4, he still cares about this country, supports Israel, and is wary of radical Islam.

The progressive/leftists are an entirely different species entirely; they do not love this country or Israel.  In fact, the far left would like nothing better than to knock the US and Israel down from their high horses.

Leftists sympathize with the “victims” of the United States, not those Americans who are brutalized by thugs or terrorists.  The left practices third-worldism,  the belief that the paths of Chavez and Lenin are vastly superior to our own Founding Fathers.  Having become smitten by the renegade image of Che Guevara, they fashion themselves as post-modern revolutionaries, who set out, with a missionary zeal, to change the world.

Consequently, leftists turn a blind eye to the savagery of the third world, e.g. the burqua or beheadings.  Progressives justify the brutality of gang violence and perhaps engage in mob behavior themselves.  While they label conservatives as reactionary, leftists are, in truth, the true reactionaries, reacting against Mommy, Daddy, God, and country.

Read more

This Week’s Smoke of Satan: How “bogus” psychological counseling is used to expel good men from “Catholic” seminaries.



In 1972, Pope Paul VI observed,

“From some fissure,
the smoke of Satan
has entered the Temple of God.”

The purpose of this weekly column is to help wake
the bulk of the world’s 1.2 billion Catholics
from their self-imposed slumber
and powerfully remind them of who they are,
and what they are called by God, to be.

This week’s story: Chapter 7 – Go See the Shrink! How “bogus” psychological counseling is used to expel good men from “Catholic” seminaries.

“If one or two years of psychological counseling
on a fee for services basis is not successful in alienating
the the man from his faith in the Church, he is given
a negative recommendation from the psychologist
which usually means another dismissal
and another lost vocation.” – Dr. John Fraunces,
psychologist and member of the Catholic Medical Association

Read more of Goodbye, Good Men: how liberals brought corruption into the Catholic Church, by Michael S. Rose

Despite the generally positive (2008/PDF) Report of the Vatican’s Apostolic Visitation of U.S. Seminaries, not much has really changed. In fact, the summary of that report was very critical of seminaries run by religious orders, and probably avoided being more critical of diocesan seminaries, only for political reasons.

In short … with few exceptions … little or nothing has changed!

Read the Vatican Report (allow time for PDF file to load)

*****

Any ideas or suggestions? Anything that’s working well
in your parish? How about things that are NOT working,
but should be? Let us know about it!

Click here to send in
your detailed comments and suggestions.
We’ll post them every Tuesday
in our new weekly column

“Dispersing the Smoke of Satan”

Your comments and suggestions are very welcome.

Thank you!

Reader comments on Michael Voris’ exclusion from World Youth Day are worth reading

Read the referenced article. Then be sure to read all the comments below.

Link

San Francisco priest defines “true orthodoxy” and its inherent tensions

“True orthodoxy,” continues Fr. Rolheiser, “asks us to hold a great tension, between real boundaries beyond which you may not go and real borders and frontiers to which you must go. You may not go too far, but you must also go far enough. And this can be a lonely road. If you carry this tension faithfully, without giving in to either side, you will no doubt find yourself with few allies on either side, that is, too liberal for the conservatives and too conservative for the liberals.

Read more

Editor’s note: I hate to think how Fr. Rolheiser’s words are being interpreted in his own home city.

Abortion lobby powers the Democratic party money machine

The abortion lobby spends about $40 million each election to help Democrats. EMILY’s List, dedicated to electing pro-choice Democratic women, operates a political action committee (which can directly fund candidates), a 527 committee (which can run only “issue ads”), and a so-called SuperPAC (which use media to support or oppose candidates). In each of the past three election cycles, the group’s PAC and 527 have both been in the top four of those supporting Democrats. The PAC has spent $82 million in that period, while the 527 has spent $35 million, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics. In 2010, the group created a SuperPAC, which spent $3.6 million, making it the fifth biggest such group in the country.

More important, however, may be the social dynamics among wealthy liberals who make up the Democrats’ fundraising network. Everywhere you see Obama and his party raising money, you see an abortion activist playing a lead role.

Read more at the Washington Examiner

Rep. Allen West to conservative women: We need you to come in and lock shields, and strengthen up the men who are going to the fight for you…

Here’s the statement West made to a group of conservative women that has people on the left riled up:

We need you to come in and lock shields, and strengthen up the men who are going to the fight for you. To let these other women know on the other side — these planned Parenthood women, the Code Pink women, and all of these women that have been neutering American men and bringing us to the point of this incredible weakness — to let them know that we are not going to have our men become subservient. That’s what we need you to do. Because if you don’t, then the debt will continue to grow…deficits will continue to grow.

Read more

Progressive Christian Creed: We recognize the faithfulness of other people who have other names for the way to God’s realm, and acknowledge that their ways are true for them, just as our ways are true for us.


Read the 3-part article

Tom Roeser on certain downtrodden minorities … and pro-lifers

…you have heard it said by Jefferson and Lincoln that all of us are equal. Not so.

All minorities are more than equal—as are these members of the downtrodden: gays, lesbians, transgenders—but not to be given any separate recognition are the unborn whose supporters come close to violating the sacred tradition of separation of church and state and allowing the pollution of the secular world with religiosity in contradistinction to the founders’ wishes.

Read more

The Passing Away of R. Sargent Shriver: Last of the pro-life liberals?

I grew up in Massachusetts during the heyday of this brand of liberalism. I actually remember consistent liberals. Sadly they are now nearly extinct. The Shriver’s stood in the proud tradition of the last truly great Democratic candidate for the Presidency of the United States; the late Pennsylvania Governor Bob Casey. He was a great champion of all the poor and a candidate whom I proudly supported in his bid for the White House. He was censored at the National Democratic Convention when the forces of death on demand in the name of “choice” took over that once great Party. He and the Shriver’s heard the cries of all of the poor, including those whom Mother Teresa rightly called “the poorest of the poor”, children living in the first home of the whole human race who have no voice but our own.

Under the leadership of the late Governor Casey, a full-page advertisement appeared in the New York Times during the Democratic Convention in July 1992 called “A New Compact of Care: Caring about Women, Caring for the Unborn.” Both Eunice and Sargent Shriver signed this document , I offer a small excerpt in honor of Sargent Shriver:

Read the article

SSPX Catholics offer explanation of authentic Catholic Tradition that is not at odds with the whole truth.

We are going to see the life and development of divine tradition first as it concerns the individual; then as it manifests itself in the Church considered as a whole. It is very important to make a distinction between these two things.

Tradition is the revealed deposit. What is in the revelation? Essentially, the revelation is the intimate life of God which is communicated to us by grace and by the sacraments. The intimate life of God is God displaying himself in three divine Persons, and the entirety of this life is communicated to us by grace, the sacraments, and Our Lord Jesus Christ. That is the essential core of the Christian revelation, the very terms of this deposit one must keep. Living tradition is the same as saying that one lives the life of God, that one is imbued with this divine life, that one lives it by the intellect, by the will, by faith, by hope, by charity and by all the virtues.

Now this Christian life-this life of tradition in our hearts, persons, and surroundings-is a participation in the immutable life of God. God does not change. The blessed in heaven contemplate the immutable God in eternity which fills them with an immense joy for all eternity. They are delighted to contemplate the same and unchanging God forever, the Source of an inconceivable and inexpressible life. This is their eternal rejoicing, and nevertheless they are fixed in the immutable. See then the error of the progressists, who wish that this would not be constant change…. No! — The spiritual life is the most unchangeable! Look at the saints in their contemplation. They are fixed on God and that is sufficient for them and nourishes their lives. I am not speaking of the ecstasies possible on earth with the body almost suspended. I am speaking of the soul who, while conducting his ordinary activities, is completely immersed and transformed in God, firm and unchangeable. We understand well that the more we live this Tradition, the more we will be fixed in the immutable who is God, and the further we will be removed from the evolution of perpetual change.

For the modem evolutionists on the contrary, life consists of perpetual change. It is very difficult for them to conceive that the highest life which already exists here on earth for the saints, for the contemplatives and those who devote themselves to prayer and meditation, consists of the contemplation of the unchangeable-and yet, thus it is!

Read more

Pope Benedict: “Stunned by Church’s wretchedness.” Why I’m Not Buying It!


Why I’m Not Buying It!

In his new book, Pope Benedict claims to be “stunned by how wretched the Church is, by how much her members fail to follow Christ.” What the Pope failed to admit is that liberalism always leads to corruption and wretchedness.

For that matter, the liberals in the church used the 2nd Vatican Council … particularly its aftermath … to take over the church, and change virtually everything that came before. And it certainly was not for the better!

Then Father Ratzinger was one (perhaps even the ring-leader) of those liberals. For over 40 years, in his writings, in his politics, and in his actions, he remained a staunch advocate for many of the most ridiculous post-Vatican II “innovations”.

Bishop Karol Wojtyla (later, Pope John Paul II) and many others, were right there with him … working side by side … dismantling 2000 years of successful, traditional Catholicism … brick by brick … altar rail by altar rail … recreating the Catholic church in their own image and likeness.

Saul Alynsky would have been proud.

And now as pope, Father Ratzinger, in his latest book, wistfully looks back, and says he is “stunned”!

Yeah. Right!

I’m not buying it … and I’m not buying his new book, either!

Shades of Casablanca

Catholicism: Not a Big Tent but rather a loving fraternity – with rules.


The religion in which I was raised was not a Big Tent but rather a loving fraternity – with rules.

With a tent, all you have to do is lift the flap and come on in, no questions asked. The fraternity requires a bit of effort on your part, a willingness to accept the membership requirements. And unlike some clubs, those requirements are not up to a popular referendum.

Yes, Vatican II did open up the club’s windows and let some fresh air circulate through the musty rooms. It gave official recognition to what was already accepted, that women were valuable contributors to both the intellectual and spiritual life of the church.

It tried to bridge the sometimes formidable divide between priests and the people sitting in the pews, abolishing (sometimes unwisely) traditions that kept God’s children at an artificial distance from him. Included in that banishment was the use of Latin as the Mass vernacular, making services more accessible (but much less beautiful) than before.

And as one of the guinea pigs who spent her puberty post-Vatican II, I appreciated the more open discussions about sexuality that occurred in church and the schools. The other stuff – cloying and annoying guitar masses, the sign of peace (ever hear of germs?) and allowing us to actually hold the Eucharist in our hands (pass the Purell) – I could have done without.

But even these changes haven’t been enough for those crusading Catholics who believe their church isn’t user-friendly, and who have tried to make dissent from the hierarchy into its own special virtue.

Read more from Christine M. Flowers

The 25 Best Ann Coulter Quotes About Liberals


21) Liberals never, ever drop a heinous idea; they just change the name. “Abortion” becomes “choice,” “communist” becomes “progressive,” “communist dictatorship” becomes “people’s democratic republic” and “Nikita Khrushchev” becomes “Barack Obama.”

See all 25

Bishop Kicanus controversy reminds writer of old Bernadin problems.

A group of homosexual activists claiming to be Catholic wants Bishop Gerald Kicanas elected as the new president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops. And I’m not the least bit surprised — although the activists hardly need to bolster their influence in the U.S. Catholic Church, considering the “lavender mafia” pretty much runs the show in many dioceses.

Cardinal Bernardin’s “Seamless Garment” later renamed the “Consistent Life Ethic,” like “The Many Faces of AIDS,” is another illustration of how Bernardin helped to advance the agenda of the Homosexual Collective. The Seamless Garment strategy set out by Bernardin in the 1980s sought to broaden the pro-life tent by expanding the movement’s opposition to abortion, euthanasia, population control and school sex instruction to include other “social justice” issues such as war and peace, opposition to the death penalty, welfare reform and civil liberties. One of the immediate effects of the Seamless Garment ethic was the increase of power and financial resources of Social Justice offices at the diocesan level where the Homosexual Collective has always been strongly represented.

Link

DECLARATION ON THE RELATION OF THE CHURCH TO NON-CHRISTIAN RELIGIONS


The Vatican document NOSTRA AETATE, proclaimed by Pope Paul VI, on October 28, 1965, makes a number of important points about Catholicism, Islam, and Judaism. And once a few inexcusably vague and misleading passages are suitably parsed and properly understood, it says nothing that any good Catholic would not (or should not) already know.

Unfortunately, most Catholics have never read NOSTRA AETATE, so it has often been misquoted and misused by some Catholics, as well as those of other faiths, to take unfair advantage, and to spread further confusion in the Catholic ranks.

I suggest you read the document for yourself. Note what is actually stated and what is not. Be very careful to make absolutely no assumptions about language therein which appears to reference certain events and/or covenants, but fails to specifically name them, describe, and/or explain their precise significance.

Also, pay particular attention to the following verses from St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, which have often been taken out of context, in order to state something that St. Paul obviously never intended:

“theirs is the sonship and the glory and the covenants and the law and the worship and the promises; theirs are the fathers and from them is the Christ according to the flesh” (Rom. 9:4-5)

Read the complete text of the St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans.

The true meaning of the document:

Catholics are called to act with unbridled charity to all, no matter what their faith tradition. Unjust and unwarranted discrimination is always to be avoided, and the dignity of persons, along with respect for their religious freedom is always to be observed, without exception. Doing anything less constitutes a serious sin. Meanwhile, Catholics are bound to affirm and uphold all the authentic teachings of the Catholic faith. Compromising on ANY of these, constitutes a serious sin.

The false, liberal “take” on NOSTRA AETATE:

All religions are valid paths to God. Those of other faiths are no longer in need of evangelization, since they have their own covenant(s) and arrangements with God.  Catholics are obligated, out of guilt for past offenses, to “roll over” and “give in” any time a non-Catholic criticizes the teachings or the actions of the Church. To do otherwise is inconsiderate, hurtful, rude, and most significantly … politically incorrect … and being politically incorrect constitutes the “unforgivable sin” against liberals, progressives, and modernists, everywhere.

Read NOSTRA AETATE for yourself

When the liberals took over the Catholic Church

Father Ratzinger at Vatican II

Next, we meet a young priest-theologian, a peritus at Vatican II, who was on the side of the progressivists from day one, and who was a close co-worker with the modernist Father Karl Rahner at the Council.

In his 1966 book about Vatican II, the young theologian sneers with contempt against the original Council schema, composed under the direction of Cardinal Ottaviani, concerning the Sources of Revelation:

    “The text was, if one may use the label, utterly the product of the ‘anti-Modernist’ mentality that had taken shape about the turn of the century. The text was written in a spirit of condemnation and negation, which … had a frigid and even offensive tone to many of the Fathers. And this despite the fact that the content of the text was new to no one. It was exactly like dozens of text-books familiar to the bishops from their seminary days: and in some cases, their former professors were actually responsible for the texts now presented to them.”42

The theologian is appalled at the prospect that the Council would actually reiterate the consistent teaching of the Church of all time; appalled that the Council would have an anti-Modernist tone in fidelity to Pope St. Pius X.

Who is the theologian sneering at the anti-Modernist approach? It is a young Father Joseph Ratzinger.

Father Ratzinger continues in the same vein:

    “The real question behind the discussion can be put this way: Was the intellectual position of anti-Modernism – the old policy of exclusiveness, condemnation and defense leading to an almost neurotic denial of all that was new – to be continued? Or would the Church, after it had taken all the necessary precautions to defend the Faith, turn over a new leaf and move on into a new and positive encounter with its own origins, with its brothers and with the world today?”43

After this gross caricaturization of the anti-Modernist position, he goes on to say that the majority opted for the second alternative – a kind of anti-anti-Modernist approach. He rejoices that it is a “new beginning” and says that the two main arguments used to defend the new position “rested on the intention of Pope John that the texts should be pastoral and their theology ecumenical.”44

Thus, both the liberal Protestant McAffee Brown, and Father Joseph Ratzinger, are thrilled that the traditional approach and the anti-Modernist bulwarks against heresy were torn down to make way for the new Radiant City of Vatican II.

The Council would go on to rip down even more safeguards, such as the precision of scholastic language and St. Robert Bellarmine’s definition of the Catholic Church, in order to clear the ground for its new ecumenical program. Father Joseph Ratzinger was delighted that these safeguards were demolished, as will be detailed next month from Father Ratzinger’s own words.45

Link

Editor’s note:
Galatians 6:8  For what things a man shall sow, those also shall he reap …

Submitted by Doria2

Modern Catholicism Lacking In Traditional Elements

The new Roman Missal, once it’s implemented in all English-speaking Catholic parishes in 2011, will be a vernacular missal faithful to the original Latin text of the traditional Mass. The English Missale Romanum that was approved in 1970 was a mere paraphrase of the original Latin text of the old Mass (or the Extraordinary Form), rather than a translation. The changes in the 2011 Missal will be significant. Regarding the future Missal, even Pope Benedict acknowledged that “many will find it hard to adjust to unfamiliar texts after nearly forty years of continuous use of the previous translation.” Those in the know say that the tone of the new Missal will emphasize the sacredness of the Divine Liturgy.

It’s inevitable, I suppose, that some Catholic modernists are not happy about the coming changes. Since Vatican II, different factions of Catholics have emerged: traditionalists, conservatives, and liberals can barely agree on anything and in many instances they are at war with one another. The coming “return to tradition” Missal has so enraged some liberal Catholics that the National Catholic Reporter, a modernist Catholic newspaper, has initiated an online petition asking that the publication of the new translation of the Missal be “delayed indefinitely.”

Ironically, Vatican II never called for the wholesale reconstruction of the Mass. Instead, Vatican II specifically envisioned Catholics learning to sing the key parts of the so called New Mass in Latin. Clearly, certain unwarranted liberties were taken over the last forty years, and this is what the Pope wants to change.

When I left the Church as a young twenty something I thought it was because I was an agnostic, but the fact is, I was unhappy at the new style of Catholic worship. In those days I felt I was the only one who felt that way but since then I’ve come to see that thousands, even millions of Catholics, are on the same wave length.

Read more

Dangerous fictions that conservatives must oppose with the same boldness, vigor, and conviction with which the other side advances them.


Here are just a few of the radical, unproven, destructive lies that conservatives are either accepting as true or that conservatives consider less important than preserving reputations, friendships, positions, peace, unity, or comfort:

• Science has proven that homosexuality is 100% heritable.

• Homosexuality is ontologically analogous to race.

• Disapproval of homosexual practice constitutes hatred of persons.

• Disordered sexual desire is constitutive of identity.

• No one can experience an eradication or diminution of same-sex attraction.

• The presence of same-sex attraction renders volitional same-sex practice moral.

• The legalization of same-sex marriage will not affect either marriage or society.

• The redefinition of marriage is a civil right.

• The redefinition of marriage will not lead ineluctably to the legalization of plural marriages.

• Homosexual couples—who are by design sterile—have a right to acquire children.

• Homosexual couples have an inherent right to create deliberately motherless or fatherless children.

• Children don’t need or have a self-evident, inalienable right to be raised when possible by the biological parents who produced them.

• Either mothers or fathers are expendable.

• Widespread cultural affirmation of homosexuality will not further undermine First Amendment speech rights.

• Widespread cultural affirmation of homosexuality will not further undermine religious liberty (Even former Georgetown University law professor and current EEOC member, lesbian Chai Feldblum, affirms that the “rights” of homosexuals should and will trump religious liberty.)

• The legalization of same-sex marriage is not a central, “existential” political issue (Only the abortion holocaust is a more critical, existential issue than marriage and the natural family).

• The affirmation or embrace of homosexuality by teachers, legislators, and judges is irrelevant.

• One can be a Christian while embracing and affirming homosexual practice.

• Society has an obligation to provide to homosexual couples through civil unions the same benefits it provides married heterosexual couples.

• Homosexuals will be satisfied with civil unions.

All of these are dangerous fictions that conservatives must oppose with the same boldness, vigor, and conviction with which the other side advances them. We must do so without regard to personal comfort or our desire to “fit in” and be liked—which are manifestations of pride and cowardice. We must not exploit the rationalization that peace and unity demand our silence or acquiescence, for truth trumps even those. We must begin to treat conservative beliefs about homosexuality as if they are objective, immutable, transcendent truths—which, of course, they are.

Courtesy: Illinois Family Action