Latin Mass tonight! October 10, 2011
Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Latin Mass, North Deanery.comments closed
There was no Latin Mass last week due a conflicting event, but there will be one tonight at St. Mark at 7pm. I pray I see you there!
Another diocese to greatly limit Communion under both kinds – UPDATE! October 10, 2011
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, episcopate, Eucharist, General Catholic, Liturgy, North Deanery, priests.comments closed
The start of a trend? A Providential response to local events? I don’t know, but I do know two things – two bishops in this country are now claiming that the indult to offer Communion under both kinds expired in 2005, and that the practice will thus be greatly limited in their dioceses. Furthermore, Bishop Morlino of Madison, WI further states that the USCCB appealed for an extension of the indult, and this extension was denied. He also states that no one in a position of authority knew the indult had expired, which is why the practice has continued everywhere in this country. I find that last bit incredible, but I suppose it’s possible.
In Phoenix, where this issue first came to light a couple of weeks ago, there was a tie-in between discontinuing the Chalice at most Masses and a marked dimunition in the perceived need for Extraordinary Ministers of Holy Communion. Bishop Morlino, below, does not note this change, but I would imagine over half the EHMCs normally used at Mass will no longer have a role to fill:
Maybe you noticed a story in last week?s Catholic Herald about new
norms for Communion under both species in the Diocese of Phoenix. You may have wondered why this story from Arizona received such prominent coverage here (on page 3 of the Catholic Herald, where letters from Bishop Morlino appear). In fact, the story was featured because it will be significant for us as well. Bishop Morlino spoke to us priests about this while we together at Wisconsin Dells at the end of last month.In the last couple of decades, Communion under both species (with the congregation able to receive the Pre-cious Blood as well as the Sacred Host) has become routine in our experience. I knew (as many of you do) that Communion under both species was first introduced, on a limited basis, after the Second Vatican Council, and that it has become much more common since. What I did not know was that the widespread American practice of offering both species at most Sunday Masses began here under an indult (special permission) given by the Vatican in 1975, which expired in 2005.
Almost no one realized that until very recently. Maybe we can be
forgiven for forgetting that we were operating under a temporary
indult. After thirty years, something can seem pretty permanent. But it wasn’t. The bishops of our country did apply for an extension of the 1975 in-dult, but that was denied.So, all over the United States, we now find ourselves needing to bring our practice into conformity with current regulations (and with the rest of the world).
This does raise the question – what about other indults? Have they expired, as well?
I ask, because there have been persistent rumors on some blogs that the indult for Communion in the hand may be ended soon. I suppose it’s possible there is confusion in the rumor mill between Communion in the hand and this “under both kinds” issue.
Another question – if Bishops Olmstead and Morlino are correct, when will we, in this Diocese of Dallas, be joining the practice of our brother Catholics around much of the rest of the world?
Deo Gratias!
UDPATE: I see some are claiming that Bishops Morlino and Olmstead are mistaken in using the expiry of an indult in their claim to end the widespread use of Communion under both kinds – apparently, the GIRMs may allow each bishop to make the call. So, either the reasoning given is extremely confusing, or mistaken, or there is some aspect that is not well understood. Anyhoo…..
Ahhh…..the irony of Planned Parenthood…… October 10, 2011
Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, asshatery, Basics, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, sadness, silliness, Society.comments closed
……or, really all the left. When it comes to global warming cooling climate change weather, the SCIENCE CANNOT BE CHALLENGED! Global warming is an incontrovertible fact, demanding that the entire world economy be decimated and submitted to central planning (the real goal). But when it comes to a true scientific fact, that conception initiates a new human life, well……..suddenly, Planned Barrenhood just can’t abide by the superstitious, fallible, often wrong science……..
When “science” is a convenient tool with which to demand acceptance of their agenda, they’ll use science. When science is opposed, they’ll oppose science. Truth doesn’t matter. Reality doesn’t matter. All that matters is the agenda, whatever the subject- abortion, the weather, national economic structures or global politics, it’s always the agenda, and everything is subordinate to it.
As if you needed more confirmation of that fact.
60 million fewer children today than in 1965…. October 10, 2011
Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, General Catholic, North Deanery, sadness, scandals, sickness, Society.comments closed
….at least in the “developed” world, or, as Mark Steyn calls it, the “overdeveloped world.” If trends do not change, we are going to start to see increasingly rapid population decreases in many countries in the next couple of decades:
The National Marriage Project, joined by universities in five nations, has published The Sustainable Demographic Dividend—a report that links the strength of families and the economy.
“A turning point has occurred in the life of the human race,” the report found. “The sustainability of humankind’s oldest institution, the family—the fount of fertility, nurturance, and human capital—is now an open question. On current trends, we face a world of rapidly aging and declining populations, of few children—many of them without the benefit of siblings and a stable, two-parent home—of lonely seniors living on meager public support, of cultural and economic stagnation.”
The authors of the report continued:
In almost every developed country, including most in Europe and East Asia and many in the Americas— from Canada to Chile—birth rates have fallen below the levels needed to avoid rapid population aging and decline. The average woman in a developed country now bears just 1.66 children over her lifetime, which is about 21 percent below the level needed to sustain the population over time (2.1 children per woman). Accordingly, the number of children age 0–14 is 60.6 million less in the developed world today than it was in 1965. Primarily because of their dearth of children, developed countries face shrinking workforces even as they must meet the challenge of supporting rapidly growing elderly populations.
From time immemorial, it was seen as a great grace, a great virtue, in virtually every culture, to marry and have a large family. It is only within the past several decades that a widespread belief has permeated the dominant culture that children are a burden, that there are “too many people,” and that adults will be happier and more fulfilled if they have few if any children, and those mostly later in life. Unfortunately, this form of living, so interested in self-pleasure, is directly contrary to the extensive welfare systems that are a hallmark of this western culture – the two cannot exist together. You cannot have a small, contracting workforce providing huge benefits for increasing numbers of elderly or unproductive citizens, unless either the workforce is horrifically taxed to the point of impoverishment, or the benefits to the elderly and unproductive are so meager as to be almost meaningless. It has been a mantra in our culture that one can have their cake and eat it, too. I think we’re going to find out, very painfully, over the next several decades that such is not the case.
I wonder how many of those 60 million fewer children were aborted? Is abortion the apotheosis of the modern, decadent, narcissistic western culture, the ultimate shirking of familial responsibility?
Two history lessons October 10, 2011
Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, disaster, episcopate, Eucharist, General Catholic, horror, Latin Mass, priests, religious, sadness, Saints, scandals, sickness, Tradition, Virtue.comments closed
I don’t know if anyone listens to these sermons from AudioSancto, but I pray you do! The first is amazing, it’s a recounting of the history of the Christeros, the faithful Mexican Catholics who refused to submit when their socialist government tried to take over, and make impotent, the Church. Really good history, but I also found it very upsetting. If you will listen, I think you will understand why:
20111009-The-Cristeros-Will-We-See-Another-Catholic-Persecution.mp3
This is how the faithful Catholics of the Christeros were treated by their enlightened socialist betters if caught:
It is sometimes interesting to reflect on the course of events in nations after persecutions of the Church are allowed or encouraged by the leaders or populace of those nations.
The next sermon discusses the Albengensian heresy and some of the history of that great, indispensable prayer, the Rosary:
20111002-There-Is-No-Problem-That-Cannot-Be-Overcome-By-The-Rosary.mp3
Truly, there is no problem that cannot be overcome by the Rosary.
Some more thoughts on Fr. Pavone October 10, 2011
Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, blogfoolery, disaster, episcopate, foolishness, General Catholic, Latin Mass, Liturgy, priests, religious, sadness, scandals, sickness.comments closed
So, I’ve gotten a fair number of very critical comments regarding my previous post on the Fr. Pavone situation, including a couple from someone who may be a priest. The major complaint seems to be that I am spreading disunity by posting some thoughts that question Bishop Zurek’s course of action. The Mark Crutcher interview video also seems to upset some folks. I think much of this concern is misplaced. Anyway, in response to those comments, I added my own comment, which I thought I would turn into a post, for the stroking of my severely overinflated ego:
………we’ve been praying for Fr. Pavone and this situation since it began. My family and I offer numerous prayer and Mass intentions for the end of abortion daily. I appreciate your viewpoint, and I agree that dissension is unpleasant, can at times be very counterproductive, and is certainly not the ideal circumstance, but I have felt moved to comment on this situation because I think the treatment Fr. Pavone is receiving merits attention. I think I caveated the post extensively, stating that all I wrote could be very wrong, and then in UPDATE1 went even further, when the news broke that Bishop Zurek intended to meet with Fr. Pavone this week. I have personally known priests who have been cast into ecclesial Siberia for doing nothing more than being good, orthodox priests, who happened to run afoul of a bishop who did not share their commitment to, or vision of, proclaiming the Truth. In fact, such instances occur all the time – there is a faithful priest who has been removed from public ministry in Waco for having the temerity to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in Latin. We as the laity can either keep praying for “unity” and better leaders, and watch good men and the Church as a whole suffer, or we can raise our voices – which, as Steve kindly pointed out, we are entitled and even required to do, when injustice or other problems emerge (we should always pray, regardless). I wrote the post based on the evidence available at that time. Perhaps my little “conspiracy theory” was ill-founded, but I do note with some irony that many who claim “UNITY!” in some situations will be the first to raise their voices in protest on some other issue. It all depends on how you view the situation – those who side with Bishop Zurek in this situation tend to call for unity and prayerful discernment, and those who side with Pavone feel it’s time to raise questions or even protest. I really am agnostic on Pavone, it’s more the situation I find difficult to accept – a faithful priest may be losing his position and a good apostolate destroyed or irreparably damaged because…….well, we’re still not even very sure of that, are we? We’ve heard that Bishop Zurek is concerned about the financials of PFL, but those claims have been strongly rebutted by documents and statements from PFL. We’ve heard it is about obedience, but we haven’t been given any concrete examples of Fr. Pavone’s disobedience. Bishop Zurek made numerous claims, and is actively trying to destroy PFL by having all bishops recommend that organization not be funded by any laity or church group, but has presented almost no evidence in support of those claims. All this behavior fits a pattern I’ve seen with regard to other good priests who have been driven out of ministry, “locked in an office in the chancery,” or placed in ecclesial Siberia. That is my main concern, that this pattern of driving priests (and others) out of public life in the Church because they are “too faithful” (or orthodox), too outspoken in defense of the Truth, and/or too liturgically orthodox (Latin Mass, frequently), is damaging to the Faith, often unjust to the priests in question, and hurts the Mystical Body of Christ. I’m sorry if the above is upsetting to people, but is reality. So, discernment is certainly called for in situations like this, and while your discernment may tell you to be prayerful and silent, mine has led me to offer some public thoughts on the situation.
We do need “unity,” but unity requires faithfulness. I have already presented this example, but if you had been around at the time of the Arian heresy, and your bishop accepted the heresy and insisted in be taught in all the churches in his diocese, would you simply meekly accept it? Numerous Saints in the past (and I am in no way comparing myself to them, I am using them as an extreme example) have created much “disunity” through their bold proclamations of the Faith and Truth, which often upset the agendas of more complacent leaders in the Church. Many Saints have been persecuted because of this. It has always been thus. As I have indicated all along, there is a possibility I have misread the situation and that Bishop Zurek is behaving with great prudence and is acting from complete charity and concern for Fr. Pavone’s apostolate, but the evidence that’s been presented thus far makes it difficult for me to accept that interpretation of events. If that interpretation becomes supported by evidence in the future, I will be the first to leap to Bishop Zurek’s defense. I look forward to see what develops after this meeting on October 13.
One other thing to consider, is that if Fr. Pavone is permitted to remain in public ministry, and even more, involved deeply with pro-life work, it could be due to the efforts of those who have expressed concern and dismay at this situation. We won’t know that, but the possibility remains, and is even likely.
One final thought – I think many people may still have a “hangover” from the Corapi situation. I sense with Pavone a reticence to either side with him, or even to get involved at all emotionally, because of a concern over getting let down again. I don’t agree with this view, either – we are bound to suffer for this Faith, we are bound to be often disappointed by the humans that make up the Church Militant, but that doesn’t mean we can simply disavow ourselves of being involved in a situation if there is some injustice or other wrong going on.
And now, on to bigger and better things.
A Blog for Dallas Area Catholics 