Foresight and Worthiness

From Athanasius' biography 'the Life of Antony of Egypt'

[Antony] denounced the Arians, saying that their heresy was the last of all and a forerunner of Antichrist. And he taught the people that the Son of God was not a created being, neither had He come into being from non-existence, but that He was the Eternal Word and Wisdom of the Essence of the Father. And therefore it was impious to say, 'there was a time when He was not,' for the Word was always co-existent with the Father. Wherefore have no fellowship with the most impious Arians. For there is no communion between light and darkness [20]. For you are good Christians, but they, when they say that the Son of the Father, the Word of God, is a created being, differ in nought from the heathen, since they worship that which is created, rather than God the creator. But believe ye that the Creation itself is angry with them because they number the Creator, the Lord of all, by whom all things came into being, with those things which were originated.

If one looks at the contemporary plagues of Mohammadeans, Zionists, and blithering christians sects, one will see that Arianism is alive and well. Dan Brown's 'DaVinci Code' is just one more grenade in the bandolier of Arianism, denying the Divinity of Jesus and calling the Apostles liars. Antony predicted this. Antony spent the better part of is life in spiritual combat against evil spirits and the fallen angel they serve, Satan. I'll take his word for it.

I've been reading ' The Eternal wisdom of the Desert Fathers' , published by Paraclete Press, and while I've just read up though Antony, I'm astonished at the love and dedication to our Lord that these men and women lived. It really shames me to compare my life to theirs, my comfort to their mortification. As much as we kvetch about loopy liturgists, Brokeback bishops, and heretical theologians, we cannot compare in our witness to those who've given up EVERYTHING for Christ. I get the same feeling when reading Bl. Teresa of Calcutta, her complete surrender to Christ, unselfish love, and gentle criticism of the rest of us slackers. Time for a wee attitude correction..

"Which of you, having a slave plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field, 'Come immediately and sit down to eat'?

"But will he not say to him, 'Prepare something for me to eat, and properly clothe yourself and serve me while I eat and drink; and afterward you may eat and drink'?

"He does not thank the slave because he did the things which were commanded, does he?

"So you too, when you do all the things which are commanded you, say, 'We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done.'"

Women Priests and Dead Parrots...

I was stumbling along the shoulder of the Information Super highway (thanks, Al), and spotted this paper explaining the philosophic genius of Monty Python:

Mr. Praline, the man attempting to return the parrot, is our verificationist, as is evidenced by his attempt to verify the death of the parrot by reference to experience, such as seeing that it's dead, its falling to the ground when sent aloft, its being nailed to its perch, and so on. The shopkeeper is our philosophically more sophisticated holist. He knows that maintaining the truth of other statements, concerning for example the bird's strength and its affection for the fiords, will allow him to maintain that the parrot is alive. Notice who wins: the shopkeeper is never brought to accept that the parrot is dead. Indeed, the sketch could go on indefinitely without that ever happening.

Makes me think of the spate of faux ordinations foisted by self-acclaimed "Women Priests".
A paraphrase and parody:

Mr. Praline: Look, I took the liberty of examining that issue when I got it home, and I discovered the only reason that it had been sitting on its perch in the first place was that it had been heralded by the mainstream media.

(pause)

Owner: Well, o'course it was heralded by the mainstream media! If I hadn't heralded that issue in the mainstream media, it would have nuzzled up to the USCCB, bent 'em apart with the Spirit of Vatican II, and
VOOM! Feeweeweewee!

Mr. Praline: "VOOM"?!? Mate, this issue wouldn't "voom" if you put four million volts through it! 'E's bleedin' demised!

Owner: No no! 'E's pining!

Mr. Praline: 'E's not pinin'! 'E's passed on! This issue is no more! He has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! Read Ordinatio Sacerdotalis! If you hadn't hoisted these women on a barge on the St. Lawrence River, They'd be blessing twinkies in their kitchens! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the
bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-ISSUE!!
...
So. There you have it. Random thought for a Tuesday night.

Take up your cross

What Kind of Cross are You?

You are the Celtic Cross: This cross was first made out of stone and is often found atop hills, in front of castles and in graveyards throughout Ireland and Scotland. The stone was carved with various symbols including a circle or halo (representing eternal life) and variations of the celtic knot.
Take this quiz!

h/t Mormon 2 Catholic

TakingBackTheirCrutch

Watch out, Boomers, there another group with which you can share your gripes about the Church, and plot to "Take Back Our Church". As if there weren't enough outlets for neo-retro-heretical musings, Robert Blair Kaiser wants you:

In fact, without your help, and the help of a million others like you, we won't be able to demand the action necessary to create the Church we need.

Mr. Kaiser, like the millions of others that he's seeking, was not properly catachised as to the origins of the Church:
Matt 16:
18"I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it.

19"I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven."

Notice that Jesus said "I will build My church": The Church we need is already built, and was built by Christ. Why does someone need to build another? Ask Photius, Henry VII, Luther, and Rev. Jonas Q. Biblethumper why a "New Church" needs to be made, and how that Men are worthy to build it.

The need of another SoVIIette (Spirit of Vatican II worshipper) group is also in question. Here's a poster in TakeBackOurChurch's forum:

Honestly, aren't the goals (both stated and implicit) of takebackourchurch.org pretty much the same goals of the "We Are Church" movement, Voice of the Faithful, the Association for the Rights of Catholics in the Church (ARCC), and those of a myriad of other dissident groups?

Even Commonweal is a bit skeptical:

I'm all for having a serious discussion of Roman centralism, a problem the Church has been struggling with since at least the Gregorian Reform, if not earlier. But pretending that the Council fathers at Vatican II had the same mindset of the Founding Fathers of the American revolution is just nonsense.

Mr Kaiser responds to the Commonweal argument:

Those in favor of "the divinely instituted hierararchical constitution of the Church" can, of course, like Talmudic scholarsm, quote paragraphs 18 and 19 of LG [Lumen Gentium](and other grafs) to support a position that simply isn't working in the context of our times.

FYI, I think it is poor scholarship to quote verses from Vatican II in order to make any kind of case for anything. We have to look at the legislative history of the Council, some of which is written down, and some of which I was personally privvy to because I was there, conducting Sunday night salons and watching the drama of the Council unfold for four sessions. I can attest that phrases like "the divinely instituted hierararchical constitution of the Church" were inserted AFTER the decisions for a people's Church were already made by huge conciliar majorities.

Hearsay also makes for poor scholarship, Mr. Kaiser, but you probably already know that. But, these assertions also highlight my contention with anti-Vatican II bloggers, that the cancer of dissent was already in the Church before the documents hit the street, as evidenced by the popular reaction to Humanae Vitae.
I'll take Jesus' Church over a 'people's Church' any day, and twice on Christmas. You want a 'people's Church'? Check out the Episcopalians, and their weather vane doctrines.

Power and Courage in Richmond

h/t Amy Welborn

From A Voice in the Diocese of Richmond, an exhortation to courageous rebellion, from...an anonymous poster.

I'm deeply distrubed by the Catholic heirarchy. Power, authority, and control appear to be their criteria. It is as if the heirachy believe all the laity is good for to follow whatever they dictate. Well, do you know what, it aint so. We the laity do have power. All we need to do is exercise our power. The powers-that-be seem to believe we are helpless. All the power, authority and control of the heirarchy will only operate for them if we permit it to have power, authority and control over us.

What power is this person talking about? The power of performing all the duties of a parish priest, from Matins to Vespers, and every pastoral and business task in between? I'm sure that the 'power' that those posessed by the Spirit of Vatican II&trade (SoVIIs, for short) are seeking is the power to change Catholic doctrine. In that case, they will forever be disappointed, not matter how many extraordinary Eucharistic ministers they co-opt, diocesan positions they fill, or DREs they plant, for the power to change doctrine is not in the Church.
They speak like marxist revolutionaries, substituting the word 'laity' in for 'proletariat', and 'heirarchy' for 'bourgeoisie'. What Would Lenin Do?

To defy this authority we must all have courage, the courage of our convictions.

Courage? Why then hide behind anonymity, if thou art so confident in thine righteous convictions?

If there are people who are afraid. that's ok too.

I believe that category is for anonymous agitators.

Sometimes Catholic brainwashing is so ingrained in a person's mind they will not, or cannot, defy Catholic authority and tradition. Our Church trained us to believe if the Church said it was so, then it was, no questions asked. A few of us have broken the mold and are using the brain power the good Lord gave us.

I guess that it's only after a trip to Room 101 that we can love the Church, to hear it from 'anonymous'. And here I am, sipping clove-flavoured gin, and loving God as He has been worshipped by 2000 years of Catholic tradition. 1 + 1 + 1 = 1.
I choose to harness the brain power in service to the heart power, which reports to the soul power, which is guided by the Holy Spirit. God wants us to use all three in our love of Him.

The new bishop in Richmond must be doing something right, if the SoVIIs' knickers are in such a twist. God bless him and his endeavors.

Falling Flat

Hmmm..

.Rush Limbaugh gets busted at an airport with someone else's Viagra..

.and then Kim Jong Il's big missile fails.

Coincidence?

I think not!

The real questions will be: How DID Rush get into Kim's medicine cabinet, and what was he REALLY looking for?

Another Traditionalist position?

From the Catholic Encyclopedia's entry on Donatists, a schismatic group which denied the validity of Sacraments administered by those they considered as traitors:

"St. Optatus gives a vehement catalogue of the excesses committed by the Donatists on their return... Since they did not admit the validity of the sacraments administered by traditors, when they seized the churches they cast the Holy Eucharist to the dogs; but the dogs, inflamed with madness, attacked their own masters. An ampulla of chrism thrown out of a window was found unbroken on the rocks."

My thoughts turned to this after I read the following joke:

Q. What are the only things that never change in a Jesuit liturgy?

A. The bread and wine.

Ahh, yes, another soul who's fed up with the relentless stream of public dissent and scandal to the Church by weak and errant clergy. I won't even go into the 'picking on the poor Jesuits' argument posited by the joke, as it belittles the efforts of faithful Jesuits who get tarred with the same brush as their copiously heretical brethren. Fortunately, our salvation doesn't hinge upon another man's fidelity to Christ and His Church, but on Christ's saving work already accomplished:

The Catholic champion, St. Optatus, Bishop of Milevis, published his great work "De schismate Donatistarum" in answer to that of the Donatist Bishop of Carthage, Parmenianus, under Valentinian and Valens, 364-375 (so St. Jerome). Optatus himself tells us that he was writing after the death of Julian (363) and more than sixty years after the beginning of the schism (he means the persecution of 303)... In the first book he describes the origin and growth of the schism; in the second he shows the notes of the true Church; in the third he defends the Catholics from the charge of persecuting, with especial reference to the days of Macarius. In the fourth book he refutes Parmenianus's proofs from Scripture that the sacrifice of a sinner is polluted. In the fifth book he shows the validity of baptism even when conferred by sinners, for it is conferred by Christ, the minister being the instrument only. This is the first important statement of the doctrine that the grace of the sacraments is derived from the opus operatum of Christ independently of the worthiness of the minister.

St. Augustine took up that same argument when dealing with the Donatists later:

After St. Augustine had become bishop in 395, he obtained conferences with some of the Donatist leaders, though not with his rival at Hippo. In 400 he wrote three books against the letter of Parmenianus, refuting his calumnies and his arguments from Scripture. More important were his seven books on baptism, in which, after developing the principle already laid down by St. Optatus, that the effect of the sacrament is independent of the holiness of the minister, he shows in great detail that the authority of St. Cyprian is more awkward than convenient for the Donatists.

Pope Innocent III puts the truly traditional Catholic perspective on efficacy of the Sacraments:

Nothing more is accomplished by a good priest and nothing less by a wicked priest, because is it accomplished by the word of the creator and not the merit of the priest. Thus the wickedness of the priest does not nullify the effect of the sacrament, just as the sickness of a doctor does not destroy the power of his medicine. Although the "doing of the thing (opus operans)" may be unclear, nevertheless, the "thing which is done (opus operatum)" is always clean
- Pope Innocent III (1160-1216)

But will that explanation suffice for detractors and critics? Probably not, but then they lose a measure of credibility when claiming to be really traditional Catholics.

Padawans today..

.always the red lightsaber they choose.

Sony DSC-H1 camera, Adobe Photoshop LE 5.0

Theologians, or Lupi Rapaces, pt 1

Dad29 has been detailing some of Marqette University theology prof Daniel Maguire's, counter-catholic activities and propagandizing, so I thought I'd do a little digging.

Pope John Paull II, in August of 1990, promulgated a document called Ex Corde Ecclesiae, and was approved for application in the US by the USCCB in November of 1999. This apostolic constitution asserts the authority of the Church in relation to Catholic universities, and much to their ire, catholic theologians. Many catholic theologians have resented and loudly resisted this concept.

Daniel Maguire, much like his peer at Notre Dame, Fr. Richard McBrien, has publicly disparaged Ex Corde Ecclesiae and refused to humbly request a mandate from the local Bishop. Here's Maguire's explanation of his resistance to submitting to the bishop:

"The mandatum would anomalously subject professional theologians to the judgment of those who are outside academe and are not professional theologians. In my judgment, no theologian could accept this without violating the integrity of his or her discipline. It also puts the bishops into the embarrassing and impossible position of judging scholars without the benefit of the appropriate expertise."

He's somehow thinking that being a theologian trumps being catholic, and that his utterances about the Catholic Church should have no accountability.

" Published theologians are always subject to corrective criticism from their peers, that is, from those who are professionally qualified to judge their work."

Hence, the bishop, being a successor to the Apostles, has no business criticising a "catholic" theologian's work.

"However, the focus of Ex Corde is not on the epistemological subtlety of the effect of changed personal commitments on cognitive objectivity. Its mission, as I see it, is thought control and a denial of the legitimacy of the theological magisterium."

That precious "theological magisterium" is only authoritative if it is in harmony with the Magisterium of the Church, not in constant defiance of it. Maguire's activities with Planned Parenthood would incur a latae sententiae excommunication in Lincoln, Nebraska, but I imagine that his own bishop is not so ready to do something so bold. Here's a stumper: Do catholic theologians have to be Catholic?

Matt 7:15-20
"Beware of the false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravenous wolves.
"You will know them by their fruits. Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they?

"So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.

"A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit.

"Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

"So then, you will know them by their fruits.

Spiritual Disarmament

H/t Titus One Nine, Anglican Mainstream

From the Episcopal Church's Presiding Bishop-elect Jefferts Shori's sermon this morning:

"Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation and we are his children. We are going to have to give up fear. Do not be afraid. God is with you. You are God’s beloved and God is well pleased with you. When we know ourselves as beloved. We can recognise another beloved in a homeless man, a rhetorical opponent. We can reach beyond the defences of others. Our invitation in the last work of this convention is to lay down our fear and love the world. Lay down our shield and sword, lay down our narrow self interest. Lay down our need for power and control, and bow to God’s image in the weakest, poorest and most excluded."

Whoa, nelly! Our mother Jesus? Gives birth? Uhm, she seems to be preaching an entirely different gospel. Ahh, yes, love the World, slide into it's warm and fuzzy embrace, there is no sin here, only goodness and light. Lay down your shield (Eph 6:16)and sword, take off that cumbersome armor(Eph 6:10-12), you don't really need it. Bow to God's image (Man) in the weakest (sinful), poorest(corrupt), and most excluded (proud).


I'm not one for the schadenfreude, but this is really telling for what lies in store for not only the Episcopal Church, but via gradual osmosis, the entire Anglican Communion. The frightening thing is that there are many in the Roman Catholic Church who already think Shori's way, and would use this language if they could get away with it. If the Chittisters, Gumbletons, and McBriens in the Catholic Church had their way, we would be following the Anglicans down the same rabbit hole.

Ephesians 6:10-16
Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might. Put on the full armor of God, so that you will be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places. Therefore, take up the full armor of God, so that you will be able to resist in the evil day, and having done everything, to stand firm. Stand firm therefore, HAVING GIRDED YOUR LOINS WITH TRUTH, and HAVING PUT ON THE BREASTPLATE OF RIGHTEOUSNESS, and having shod YOUR FEET WITH THE PREPARATION OF THE GOSPEL OF PEACE; in addition to all, taking up the shield of faith with which you will be able to extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. And take THE HELMET OF SALVATION, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

Zero Tolerance?

On the issue of communion, [McCarrick] said there was "no substitute for the local bishop's pastoral judgment and his vital relationships with Catholic public officials in his own diocese."

Yes, the bishop's pastoral judgment is the final arbiter of a catholic politician committing sacrilege at Mass, and giving scandal to the Church while in office. Let's just juxtapose this upon another situation...

On the issue of communion, [McCarrick] said there was "no substitute for the local bishop's pastoral judgment and his vital relationships with sex-offending priests in his own diocese."

Doesn't have the same cachet, eh? Now I would posit that defending the Faith is just as vital and important as protecting children from molesters, so why not paint a similar situation with politicians? First, from Article 5, Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People:

Diocesan/eparchial policy is to provide that for even a single act of sexual abuse of a minor*—whenever it occurred—which is admitted or established after an appropriate process in accord with canon law, the offending priest or deacon is to be permanently removed from ministry and, if warranted, dismissed from the clerical state..

The diocesan/eparchial bishop is to exercise his power of governance, within the parameters of the universal law of the Church, to ensure that any priest or deacon subject to his governance who has committed even one act of sexual abuse of a minor as described below shall not continue in ministry.

Let's change some of the language, shall we:

Diocesan/eparchial policy is to provide that for even a single act of voting for or proposing legislation contrary to Catholic Teaching—whenever it occurred—which is admitted or established after an appropriate process in accord with canon law, the offending politician is to be Latae Sententiae under particular personal interdict and, if warranted, excommunicated..

The diocesan/eparchial bishop is to exercise his power of governance, within the parameters of the universal law of the Church, to ensure that any politician subject to his governance who has committed even one act of voting for or proposing legislation contrary to Catholic Teaching, as described below, shall neither continue to give scandal the the Church nor commit sacrilege against the Blessed Sacrament.

Ouch. Tough stuff, eh? Well, if violating the doctinal purity and discipline of the Church were viewed as grave as the abuse of minors, there would be more outcry to make politicians who claim to be Catholic actually behave so. But why would we want that? It's obvious that to be a successful politician, you need to worship the will of the people.

McCarrick said the church needs "more, not fewer Catholics in political life" and said that after one of the most challenging duties in his 30 years as a bishop, the task force was now disbanding its work.

Your Eminence, we still need them to be Catholic, and being Catholic entails being in full communion with Rome.

Doing the Math

h/t GOP Soccer Mom

One of the advantages of being Roman Catholic is that one is spared the burden of being one’s own pope. Had I still been an Anglican, I would have been forced to agonize over Scripture, Tradition, and Scientific evidence until I came to some understanding as to what moral position I should hold, and after a great deal of careful reading and honest reflection would likely have gotten it wrong anyway. Being a Catholic however, I am both permitted and expected to assume that the position of the Church, (incredible and unfair though it might appear) is actually the correct one, and simply work backward. It is like having an Algebra textbook with the answers in the back. One still needs to do one’s homework if one is ever expected to get on in math; however if you know how the equation is supposed to end, it is easier to work out the solution.

Clueless Christian

Time To Clean Out the Bathtub

Msgr. Timothy Stein of the Altoona-Johnstown diocese thinks that traditional worship is just bath water:

“Smells and bells” and other assorted paraphernalia are supposed to help us nurture our relationship with Jesus. When they become a stumbling block, and prevent us from seeing Jesus, knowing Jesus, walking with Jesus, or when they obscure the path to Jesus for others, they must be put aside, or at least, reassessed. There were good reasons for throwing out so much of the bathwater. It had become murky. It was no longer serving a good purpose. It was time to take the baby from the bath, and move on.

Well, if traditional worship was a stumbling block, than contemporary worship is a complete blockade. By his logic, after ridding ourselves of inhibitive traditions, we should be booming, a nation of saints. Would anyone state that there has there been any meaningful growth, either in numbers or in devotion, to the Church here in America, aside from heretical groups? To the contrary, the last thirty years have been rife with apostasy, heresies, and schisms.

Beware the bathwater! Hidden in its depths may be a dose of pretty poison - - the temptation to idolatry - - the temptation to worship fleeting forms while ignoring lasting, enduring substance. Don’t mistake devotion to exterior signs for an interior conversion to life in union with Jesus.

Yes, and don't mistake disregard of external signs for an interior conversion as well. It's just the opposite, if I recall scripture right, a good tree will produce good fruit, a very external sign. The tree that the monsignor is satisfied with has resulted in a lot of bad fruits. How about we dump the bathwater of the Spirit of Vatican II&trade theology, clean out the tub, then get back to the clean water?

I hate being right

The upcoming, at the time, Boston Gay Pride Parade was the subject of discussion over at Lair of the Catholic Cavemen, and I mentioned that it would be telling where Fr. Walter Cuenin popped up in the festivities. Little did I realize that he would be the headline in the Boston Globe: Ousted Newton priest cheered at gay pride service

A Catholic priest preached yesterday at the main worship service associated with Boston's gay pride week, setting up a potential conflict with a church hierarchy that has been increasingly vocal in its criticism of the growing acceptance of gay relationships in Western societies.

The Rev. Walter H. Cuenin, a longtime advocate of outreach to gays and lesbians in the Catholic Church, did not criticize or dispute Catholic teaching during his remarks, and he quoted several times from a 1997 document issued by the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, which declared that ``the teachings of the Church make it clear that the fundamental human rights of homosexual persons must be defended."

So, a priest goes to a demonstration whose sole purpose is to elevate sin, and instead of admonishing the participants, he instead insists that the Church should uphold the dignity of those who adore their own sins. Hmm. Gross negligence, in failing to minister to the obvious need for spiritual guidance? How does leaving those in sin as captive to that sin fulfil his duty as a successor to the Apostles?

" Master, as you were on your way, your dear friend Lazarus has died."
" Oh well, I shall go to him anyway."
" Master, is there anything you can do?"
"Yes, roll back the stone."
Several men roll back the stone, and recoil from the stench of Lazarus' corruption.
" Lazarus, I uphold your inherent dignity, and I hope that tomb is comfy. You're going to be in there for quite a while.."
" Is that all, Master, you're just going to leave him in there?"
" Sure, God made him dead, why mess with that? Oh, look at the time! I've got a lunch at L'espalier to get to."

It just doesn't work. But, Fr. Cuenin thinks so:

`I told a friend of mine, about a month ago, that I was going to be here today, speaking at the gay pride interfaith service, and she said to me, `What's a Catholic priest doing at a gay pride service?' Cuenin said. ``My response was, `Why wouldn't a Catholic priest be here?' In the tradition of my own Christian faith, it seems to me, as I read it, that Jesus was always with those who were often the target of hatred and persecution."

Fr. Cuenin forgets, like so many others of his ilk, that Jesus called those sinners to repentance during His visits. "Go, and sin no more."(John 8:11, for those who actually believe sacred Scripture) Ring a bell, Fr. Cuenin? I'll let the Cavemen give Fr. Cuenin the lashing that my sense of charity forbids.

Fr. McBrien is STILL Demoralized..

. and shows no sign of stopping. More Unhappy tidings to come.

Fr. McBrien parses Catholics into four camps: Ultra Conservatives, Moderate Conservatives, Moderate Liberals, Radical Liberal. He then illustrates a bit on the Ultracons:

Centrist Catholics do not view their moderate counterparts on the left or the right as an "ultimate threat" (Father Radcliffe's words) to their own place in the Church. Only Catholics of the far right view fellow Catholics that way --- in this case, moderately liberal Catholics and probably some moderate conservatives as well.

I beg to differ wih the good father, as his last column illustrates his terror at the conservative actions of conservative bishops. Fr. McBrien then shows some of the roots of his demoralization:

Father Andrew Greeley, a distinguished author and sociologist, has frequently pointed out that it was not the Council but Pope Paul VI's 1968 birth-control encyclical, Humanae Vitae, that opened the breach within the post-conciliar Church. If the pope had sided with the 2-1 majority of his Birth Control Commission and modified the official teaching on contraception, the post-Vatican II history of the Church might look entirely different.

And if his successor, John Paul I, had not died after only 33 days in office, the Church's hierarchy around the world might look entirely different as well.

He's absolutely right, it does go all the way back to Humanae Vitae, and the clergy's and laity's responses to it: Who can submit to the Church, and who will demand that the Church submit to the World. " If only the pope had sided with the 2-1 majority" is a crock, the Pope always has to side with the Magisterium, and guided by the Holy Spirit, he did just that. If, as Fr. McBrien fervently wishes, the Pope had sided with the majority opinion, we'd be in the same dire straits as the Anglican Communion and the divided United Methodist Church. Public opinion is the shifting sands on which no church can last.

Catholics of the far right, and bishops who share and enforce their ecclesiology, insist that obedience is one of Catholicism's primary virtues and that the teaching of the hierarchy, and especially the pope's, is the only sure guide to saving truth.

Obedience was one of Jesus' primary virtues as well, an obedience unto death, as with his mother Mary, by whose obedience unto life gave us our Savior. It's such an alien thought to the hippies, this concept of obedience. The article devolves from there into another gripe about Bishop Finn and his iron-fisted gardening style. Suffice to say, Fr. McBrien is still demoralized, and I'll bet that he'll continue to sulk in the future.

Lavender Mafia Disappears With A Poof

No, the blog titled "The Lavender Mafia" has pulled the plug. What were you thinking of?

Brother Angelo Mary started the blog about a month ago, then had to bail, leaving it to some others. The content was fair, and didn't resort to unnecessary invective, but stuck to the facts. The recent disappearance leaves one to believe that either the Lavender Mafia is an urban legend, or that Brother Angelo Mary is now laid to rest next to Jimmy Hoffa. Does anyone know?

Pentecost Sunday in my church was without Rainbow Sash drama. But, St. Therese's a small parish in Lincoln, Nebraska. So, while defiance would get some press, there seems an expectation that Rainbow Sashers would get excommunicated faster than you can say 'Judy Garland'.

The alternate reading in the missal was an apt message to those folks caught up in the Rainbow Sash Movement:

Galatians 5:16-25

Brothers and sisters, live by the Spirit
and you will certainly not gratify the desire of the flesh.
For the flesh has desires against the Spirit,
and the Spirit against the flesh;
these are opposed to each other,
so that you may not do what you want.
But if you are guided by the Spirit, you are not under the law.
Now the works of the flesh are obvious:
immorality, impurity, lust, idolatry,
sorcery, hatreds, rivalry, jealousy,
outbursts of fury, acts of selfishness,
dissensions, factions, occasions of envy,
drinking bouts, orgies, and the like.
I warn you, as I warned you before,
that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
In contrast, the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace,
patience, kindness, generosity,
faithfulness, gentleness, self-control.
Against such there is no law.
Now those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified their flesh
with its passions and desires.
If we live in the Spirit, let us also follow the Spirit.

The RSM can obfuscate the nature of their dilemma all they want, but scripture and tradition make the truth painfully clear. The defiant defense of immoral sexuality, in any form, is a work of the flesh, nothing more.

Wormwood coming? Don't tell Hal Lindsey.

Odd tidbit from CNN.com:

In April, Louis, a solid-state physicist at Mahatma Gandhi University, published a paper in the prestigious peer-reviewed journal Astrophysics and Space Science in which he hypothesizes that the samples -- water taken from the mysterious blood-colored showers that fell sporadically across Louis's home state of Kerala in the summer of 2001 -- contain microbes from outer space.

Blood colored rain? Uh-Oh..

Louis speculates that the particles could be extraterrestrial bacteria adapted to the harsh conditions of space and that the microbes hitched a ride on a comet or meteorite that later broke apart in the upper atmosphere and mixed with rain clouds above India.

A large rock from space, you say?

Revelation 8
8 The second angel sounded, and something like a great mountain burning with fire was thrown into the sea; and a third of the sea became blood,

9 and a third of the creatures which were in the sea and had life, died; and a third of the ships were destroyed.

10 The third angel sounded, and a great star fell from heaven, burning like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of waters.

11 The name of the star is called Wormwood; and a third of the waters became wormwood, and many men died from the waters, because they were made bitter.

I can't wait to see if anyone jumps on this one as a 'sign' of the impending apokalypse.

Fr. McBrien is Demoralized..

In an article called Demoralization in the Church, Fr. Richard McBrien lays some smack down on Fr. Timothy Radcliffe, over a speech Fr. Radcliffe gave at the Los Angeles Religious Education Congress:

He had spoken, for example, of the gap between church teaching and the views of many ordinary Catholics without acknowledging the possibility that the gap exists, not simply because of a lack of understanding on the laity's part or a failure on the hierarchy's part to communicate its teachings effectively, but because many ordinary Catholics regard certain teachings as wrong.

Fr. McBrien is not "acknowledging the possibility" that the Church's teaching is right, and that he and many other catholics are wrong. Yes, ordinary Catholics may think some teachings are wrong, because they don't understand neither the teachings themselves nor the Magisterium of the Church. Apparently, Fr. McBrien also has trouble with those topics as well. It's a good thing that the Magisterium, and truth of Catholic doctrine, do not hinge on Catholics understanding or support of those teachings.

Conservative bishops (or what he would now refer to as Communion Catholics) hold a disproportionate amount of power that makes real brotherly and sisterly conversation impossible, for all practical purposes.

Yes, dialog with those pesky conservative bishops is difficult, with them always bringing Scripture and the Catechism into the conversation. It's hard to sway someone if they're always holding onto a firm position. Fr. McBrien insists on overstating the number of conservative bishops, but I imagine that he's just projecting his phobias a wee bit.

Only in those dioceses where a bishop who operates --- mentally, emotionally and pastorally --- outside of the broad center of Catholicism do we find any "strangulation" of missionary and evangelizing activities. One such diocese, Kansas City-St. Joseph, was featured in the May 12 issue of NCR.

Fr. McBrien is still sulking over that affair? Missionary and evangelizing activities abound in the Diocese of Lincoln, Nebraska, home of every liberal's arch-nemesis, Bishop Fabian Bruskewitz. I think it's time for the embittered catholics, lay and clergy, to get a grip that the Church is NOT a democracy and that the Truth is not negotiable.

Taxing the Dead to Death

As I've mentioned before, I love getting e-mail from Sojourners. It's like having a conversation with a very young child, who in learning to speak, makes some interesting nonsense along the way. This issue was the Estate Tax, and how those mean old republicans want to make it go away. Jim Wallis himself is up on the soapbox this time.

let's call it a "common good tax" - is focused where it was intended, on those who have benefited so much from the opportunities of America. In a very real sense, the estate tax is a repayment for the public services and infrastructure that enable wealth creation - our transportation system of highways, bridges, and airports; our legal and educational systems; and many other investments we make in our society.

Earth to Jim, Earth to Jim, that's why we have several taxes ALREADY IN PLACE to handle those issues:

Federal Income Tax
Capital Gains Tax
State Income Tax
Property Tax
Federal Gasoline Tax
Sales Tax (most states)
Motor Vehicle Tax (as if standing in line at the DMV wasn't taxing enough)
Telecommunications Fees (Universal Service Fund)

It is only right that having benefited so much from the opportunities of America, the wealthiest should be obligated to return some of their good fortune to expand the opportunities of other Americans..

If you look at the list of taxes above, you'll see that those with the most are already paying more than most. What Democrats want is a chance to tax someone's income and wealth twice, maybe even three or four times, from generation to generation.

Is this the America that we want? One whose top policy priority is to make the rich richer while abandoning the most needed efforts to reduce poverty and protect the common good?

Enough with the class-struggle rhetoric. It's a shame that Sojourners has become a shill for Tax-N-Spend Democrats, as all this talk about faith ends up sounding hollow when it's just being used to justify an attempt at socialism.

A Life of Prayer and Penitence

I've had an idea, mulling in my brain, of what to do with clerical sex-offenders, rather than laicization or giving them the Caveman treatment. Why not establish a monastic order, dedicated to either St. Charles Lwanga, or St. Agnes of Rome, where violators can continue to work out their salvation in fear and trembling, but away from the temptations that they obviously are ill-equipped to resist. This is a long-term solution, not a couple month jaunt to St. Luke's Institute, and then a quiet reassignment. This would be voluntary: Either the violator accepts an obedience to report to the order (after his sentance is served in prison), or he gets laicized and thrown to the legal wolves.

The rule would be severe, the labor plentiful, and the comforts few. Contact with the outside world would be limited, to help the penitents refocus on their spiritual labors. No griping about the life to writers from the National Catholic Reporter, or other such public displays. The monks will farm, build, do special community projects, if needed, to generate some revenue to offset some of the costs to the host diocese(s).

This will NOT be a cloister for deviant religious to practice their deviancy. Medication to correct imbalances should be made available to help the penitent's get on an even keel, as well as real counselling (not just thereputic affirmation) for their psychological and spiritual shortcomings. The doctrine and liturgies will be traditional, with no disregard for rubrics. We don't want to substitute one kind of abuse for another.

This is just a basic idea I've been mulling. Anyone have some constructive additions to make? I'm thinking that if this model would work for violators already in the clergy, it could be widened to include laity as well. Society as a whole is struggling with what to do with sex offenders, and we could try to get them into an environment where their inherant dignity is upheld while keeping society shielded from further relapses. God loves sex offenders too, but society has not found a way to help them. Jail doesn't help their problems, and when they get out, the stigma and legal requirements make a normal life impossible.

Gimme feeback, link the heck out of it. I'd like to see everyone talking about this, if even for 5 minutes. And the discussion shouldn't start with " When can we put (insert name of suspect bishop here) in there?" But bishops would not be above inclusion, should the Pope see a need for it.