jump to navigation

On the errors of the Big Ban theory September 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Admin, awesomeness, Basics, Bible, Christendom, error, foolishness, General Catholic, history, priests, religious, scandals, secularism, Society.
comments closed

I pray VideoSancto turns this into a video one day. It’s worth it.

The priest below reveals some of the many problems with modern cosmology and the whole theology of sciencism that undergirds much modern thinking. Fr. Chad Ripperger’s book on the philosophical errors of evolution is referenced.  This is timely, since I just discussed the errors of Youcat, the youth catechism which undermines the authority of Sacred Scripture and strongly implies that evolution-based theory is correct, or, at least, more probable than the mythology of Scripture.

Well worth your time.  Father is certainly an engaging speaker.

http://www.audiosancto.org/auweb/20130818-Science-Cannot-Explain-History-Errors-of-Big-Bang-Cosmology.mp3

Mexican bishop calls those who accept Scripture “mentally ill….” September 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, disaster, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, horror, persecution, pr stunts, scandals, self-serving, sexual depravity, sickness, Society, Spiritual Warfare.
comments closed

……at least so far as the constant belief of the Church regarding homosexual acts is concerned.  This video has made some rounds, but I’m going to give it more coverage, and add a bit more from Switzerland below.  Bishop of Saltillo Raul Vera gave an interview in which Sacred Scripture is not mentioned even once, but constantly appealed to “science” and alleged normalization of same sex attraction and acts of sodomy which science, allegedly, provides.

He apparently believes that “science” has proved that homosexuality is formed in the womb, in spite of the ever growing numbers of studies that demonstrate the complete opposite.  He has the gall to threaten a mother with something akin to excommunication because she is concerned with her son hanging out with sodomites, which this wolf in shepherd’s clothing blames on her.

He then says that you have to be sick in the head to see homosexuals as depraved and promiscuous. Well, first of all, the data is clear, active homosexual men are, without doubt, promiscuous. Even their so-called marriages almost invariably are not monogamous. Secondly, the bishop, in this disastrous discourse, is constantly confating the act and the inclination.  Simply having temptations towards same sex acts is not a sin, but going over to embracing the lifestyle is extremely disordered, and the acts are, it is plain from Scripture both Old Testament and New, among the most offensive sins to God possible. The entire excerpt is just one long rant, so wrong I would say it’s diabolical.  Anyone excommunicated by this man for upholding the Church’s constant belief regarding sodomy should have a field day with this guy in canon law court, if they can get a reasonable one in Mexico.

Incredibly, when this guy finally does get around to mentioning Scripture, he claims those texts which very clearly denounce sodomy “have to be read more carefully.”  Which means, redefined so they mean nothing, or claim to say the opposite of what 2000 years of Faith and Tradition have always said they mean.  As I said, this is diabolical. To think he is the shepherd responsible to answer to God for millions of souls, is devastating.

I’ve heard this guy was an extreme liberal before, I guess that’s confirmed. The only exculpatory fact is that the video is obviously edited, but many ofthese statements cannot be attributed to clever editing.

This video is an unmitigated disaster.

Meanwhile, it is being reported that the Catholic Diocese of Basel, Switzerland, has been performing “blessings” of same-sex simulations of marriage for a decade or so.  And, such was going on while the very progressive, and current head of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity Cardinal Kurt Koch, was ordinary of the Diocese of Basel:

In the diocese of Basel “church celebrations” for gomorrist couples have long been the practice. That was under Bishop Kurt Koch [Current Curial Official for Christian Unity] who did nothing about it before he moved to Rome in 2010. Back in November 2003, a Pastoral Conference of Cantonal Church of Basel-Country, a “blessing ceremony” for aberrosexuals was approved by a large majority, although the Swiss Bishops Conference had rejected such. 2004 events were organized in several parishes in the Canton of Basel-Country as completely normal: held for lesbians and gays as in the Parish Center Bruder Klaus in Liesta and the parish center Epiphany in Füllinsdorf . “Partnerships for gays and lesbians still have a hard time finding recognition in our society and in our Church,” says one of the Pastoral Conference Basel booklets published, Celebrate the Love? Bless Love. “That’s why they needed a sign a binding and strengthening commitment” ‘to live the gift of their love as a valuable and liberating gift.'” As early as 21 January 2004 an enthusiastic Basler Zeitung wrote: “Specifically: Gay and lesbian partners have the opportunity to bless their love before a pastor of their confidence. Legally, this blessing really has no legal consequences. But to us, it is about making a mark,’ said Father Felix Terrier. “Terrier is pastor of Liestal.

Tancred at Eponymous Flower also provides, in the same post, a translation of the description of the life of a self-admitted active homosexual priest, the contents of which are beyond what I want to post.  Suffice it to say, this priest – who has in reality excommunicated himself, and whose faculties are, at best, highly dubious – admits to constant self-gratification, in addition to hosting numerous male lovers in the rectory.  He also admits to bending Scripture to fit his preferred lifestyle, and to harassing a heterosexual sacristan he had the hots for.  All in a days work for someone who tosses their most sacred, solemn vows out the window when lust comes a callin’.

The similarity of this behavior, to that of the founders of protestantism, is chilling. Cranmer was a bigamist while still a Roman priest, Luther married a former nun before dispensed from his vows, and according to many sources loved him some good bar wenches, while the Anabaptists of Muenster are legendary for their perversion and degradation.

The Pope who finally cleans up this mess, or even seriously begins the process, wil be one of the greatest Saints with which God has ever blessed His Holy Church. Please, Lord, send us that man NOW.

The many problems of Youcat September 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in asshatery, Basics, catachesis, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, the return.
comments closed

A little over two years ago, a then new youth catechism, called Youcat, was released to great fanfare.  It was supposed to be a hip, pocket-sized version of the current adult catechism, with little bells and whistles to attract kids to read it.  It didn’t take long before some reviewers began to note problems with Youcat.  I was one of them. Problems ranged from an initial Italian translation that endorsed contraception use, to the use of huge numbers of quotes from protestants, movie stars, and all around atheists to somehow support the main text (why not Catholics?), a possibly highly inappropriate and offensive cartoon used at one point, and worse.

Faithful Answers has a post up that sort of encapsulates all the problems, and they are, in fact, even worse than what I found in my own reviews.  They are much more substantial than those above, especially #1 below, which plays to all our worst cultural conceits and the whole modernist assault on Sacred Scripture as a reliable source of revelation.  Each of the objectives listed below is strongly argued, but I’ll only list some of the supporting text for objection 1, for brevity’s sake, and to give you a reason to read the article at Faithful Answers:

Objection #1: YOUCAT insinuates that The Holy Bible contains errors.

Objection #2: YOUCAT gives confusing catechesis on human sexuality and end of life issues.

Objection #3: YOUCAT alleges that Genesis does not give a true account of creation.

Objection #4: YOUCAT Places greater weight on modern scientific speculation than on the Church Fathers’ unanimous interpretations of the first chapters of Genesis.

Objection #5: YOUCAT teaches that God made an incomplete world filled with defects and deformities.

Objection #6: YOUCAT can give the impression that modern Catholic and non-Catholic authors are more important for young people to read than the Fathers and Doctors of the Church.

Breaking out some supporting text for item 1:

The most serious error in YOUCAT can be found in Question 15 which addresses the question:

How can Sacred Scripture be “truth” if not everything in it is right?

Here, YOUCAT makes a problematic statement in question form, avoiding the appearance that it is the authors who are questioning the truth and accuracy of Sacred Scripture. The question also uses the phrase that “not everything in it is right” to avoid the obvious heresy that Sacred Scripture contains errors or that inspiration extends only to matters of faith and morals.

Rather than countering this misguided question with the explanation that all of Scripture is God-breathed and immune from error, the YOUCAT authors provide the following answer:

The Bible is not meant to convey precise historical information or scientific findings to us. Moreover, the authors were children of their time. They shared the cultural ideas of the world around them and often were also dominated by its errors.Nevertheless, everything that man must know about God and the way of his salvation is found with infallible certainty in Sacred Scripture (emphasis and underline added).

By stating that the Bible does not seek to convey “precise historical information” and that the Scriptural authors were often “dominated” by the “errors” of their time, YOUCAT creates the impression that the Sacred authors were simpletons whose writings contain errors, or that only those things needed for salvation are presented in Scripture without error. Yet such a position is a repudiation of the constant and never-interrupted teaching of the Church on Scriptural inerrancy and contradicts YOUCAT’s own teaching in another section where the Bible is called the “Word of the living God.”

How should YOUCAT have responded to the question? Recognizing that “the Word of the living God” cannot possibly contain errors of any kind, the Catholic Church has always taught that the whole of Scripture was written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and that, since God is the principal Author of Scripture, the books of the Bible cannot contain any errors at all. This teaching on complete inerrancy, affirmed by Sacred Scripture, the Church Fathers and Doctors, plus the councils of Florence (1431-1443), Trent (1545-1563) and Vatican I (1869-1870), was also reiterated by Leo XIII in Providentissimus Deus (1893)……….

————–End Quote————

This issue of undermining Sacred Scripture is huge. I have encountered many people who have either been taught, or come to believe, that Scripture is, for the most part, just old myths and legends that have been sort of cobbled together into some kind of, ultimately man-made, religion.  That is essentially the claim of the modernists, who have held utter sway in the fields of catechesis and apologetics for nearly a century.  Many regular folk consider that maybe most of the New Testament is at least somewhat real, but the Old Testament, with its wars and miracles and other aspects, is just recycled mythology.

Which is really a disaster, because the Old Testament is the precursor of the New, at hundreds of places pointing to Christ and the New Covenant. Ultimately, all this doubt points back to the first three chapters of Genesis, which is why the Church defended that history as real and accurate for so very long, even though today, with the modernists ascendent, that defense is weak to non-existent. People have been taught to disbelieve Scripture through disbelief of the first three chapters of Genesis – that the earth is billions of years old, not several thousand, that the theory of evolution is completely proven, scientific “fact” (like global warming!), etc. And while belief in the Genesis history of Creation is not dogmatic, it was for a very long time at least doctrinal, and its undermining has been the key point in the modernist attempt to reduce Christ to a man (if he existed at all), pretend the Resurrection never happened, and make the Faith just a pantheistic new age confab – essentially, to make the Faith what they claim it to be, just one old mythology among many.

I used to think acceptance of the story of Creation in Genesis (being nondogmatic) not that important. But more and more, I think it critically important. When we have well known and ostensibly orthodox Catholic exegetes like Fr. Robert Barron running around casting doubt on the reality of Adam and Eve as real people (then, why did we need a Savior, with no Original Sin?), and incredibly damaging but influential modernists like Fr. Hans Kung (still a priest in good standing!) rejecting just about all of Genesis…..it’s not hard to see how all this undermines Faith in ALL of Scripture, not just “the important bits.”

Then, to have an official Catechism seem to join in this doubting, even implying that much of the Old Testament was just screwball fantasy, weird tales handed down orally from generation to generation and mangled in a thousand different ways…..it’s just too much.  It’s too much to expect a vibrant, transforming faith to emerge in souls exposed to so much doubt, criticism, and attack.

I know embracing Genesis 1-3 as real history may seem radical, even strange. For some really great resources on the huge problems with evolution, and on the traditional Catholic theology and history of Creationism, see the Kolbe Center website.  It is an inestimable resource, and one I should really share more of.

 

A little more data about how the revolution in the Church came to pass September 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Basics, catachesis, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, Liturgy, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, Society, the return.
comments closed

As I have written many times before, the revolution which seemingly burst on the Church in the mid-20th century had been a long time in the making.  Put differently, Vatican II, and especially the radical departures from traditional piety that started at and increased exponentially after the Council, did not just happen.  A huge groundwork had been laid, going back decades, to provide the seed bed for many, if not virtually all, the changes that exploded on the Church in the late 60s and early 70s.  For instance, I have written about how the liturgical movement , begun with good intentions in the early 20th century, had, by the 1950s, become a vehicle for radicals of all kinds, who sought to re-invent the timeless Liturgy in order to advance their particular pet projects, be it ecumenism, modernist, or what have you. Even in 1943, almost 20 years before Vatican II began, some laity had had more than enough with all the liturgical experimentation and snide, derogatory comments about the Mass they loved.

Of course, the entire modernist movement, with its elevation of the theory of evolution over Christ and His Revelation, had been around since the late 1800s.  It was quite widespread when Pope St. Pius X attempted to crush it in 1907, but it just went underground, to re-emerge, in academia, liturgical elitists, and, especially, religious orders, in the 20s and 30s. By the time he was finally getting in serious trouble with the Vatican, that great god-father of Vatican II, Teilhard de Chardin, could confidently state that what happened to him didn’t matter, he had so many disciples in places of high influence, his errors could not be extirpated from the Church.  He was quite right.

Supertradmum has given us, via her blog, another few bits of data to demonstrate how Vatican II was not some sudden explosion of neo-modernism on the Church, as if a bolt from the blue, but was simply the result of patient effort and the steady growth of influence of many highly placed individuals with ideas of radically re-shaping the Faith (I add emphasis and comments):

I have spoken with several priests, now in their very old age, who said that they entered the seminaries in the 1950s, well before Vatican II, in order to make the Church more Protestant. Vatican II is a result of earlier changes in thinking, not the start of liturgical changes, and one only has to look at the type of theology taught even between the wars for clarity. Theology was geared already in the 1950s towards ecumenism, the only ideal which many priests and bishops thought would keep Christianity safe from communism and socialism. [I would add that ecumenism fits very well with the indifferentism which was identified by Pope Leo XIII as being a foundational aspect of the heresy of Americanism.  And the American hierarchy probably never exercised wider influence over the worldwide Church than in the two decades following WWII.]

I have often told the history of the twelve experimental dioceses in America on liturgical reform, as I grew up in one. I have only met two priests in my life willing to discuss this real concerted effort to change the Vatican’s ideas on liturgy by manipulating successful scenarios with course and incremental changes.

My parents, starting before, I repeat, before, and during Vatican II, were part of a diocesan training for the laity. Lay people were divided up into home courses on the history of the liturgy, with built in explanations which would explain changes. Now, I was too young, but babysat my brothers while my parents were part of  these classes in peoples ‘homes. The parish priest would go to these meetings. Then, the liturgy was changed in light of this build up and feedback was gathered from the laity. All of it would have been positive, as the people were primed for the changes, which were introduced incrementally.

The results of these twelve dioceses were sent back to Rome, which then promulgated the changes. [I think some of these experiments played a role in the changes made to the liturgy in the 1950s, when the liturgical movement began to score its first successes.]  I did not realize until fourteen years later, when I moved to Minneapolis as a young adult, and talked to people there, how unusual my parent’s and their fellow diocesan adults’ experience were. I began to piece together this occurrence, but it was not until, forty or so years later, I kid you not, that two priests from widely separated dioceses, were willing to spill the beans on this event-the experimental, incremental changes in the liturgy coupled with courses, which created highly successful feedback for Rome. [This is true, I have read in studies of the history of the liturgy that the experiments were gamed to only report what those who sought radical changes in the Liturgy wanted reported back to Rome. Dom Alcuin Reid refers to this, at least obliquely.  As I noted in the post above, this began in Europe even well before WWII, where some pushback was evident by the early 40s.  There were some full-on protestant hootenanies in place in some of the wilder liturgical environs in Germany in the 1920s. The German bishops had been warned of the creeping indifferentism and abuses, and especially the stripping of the sacrificial, propitiatory character of the Mass.  This was all of a piece….to please disaffected protestants and attempt to arrive at a one world great big ecumenical liturgy.]

So, the breakdown of hierarchy started in seminary training before Vatican II and the liturgical changes were likewise planned. Vatican II is a result, not the beginning of the undermining of both hierarchy and liturgy. [No, it was its culmination.  So far. But let there be a Vatican III, and you’ll really see some undermining!]

———————-End Quote————-

Fr. Joseph Clifford Fenton, perhaps the greatest American theologian ever, and fully orthodox, among others, felt a great foreboding prior to the convening of Vatican II.  Even as a peritus at the Council, he could see the constant belief of the Church being slowly unwound. He felt this foreboding, because he had been fighting a heroic rearguard action against certain elements in the American Church dramatically in favor of ecumenism (tending towards indifferentism), enlightenment concepts of “liberty” and “rights” (which emerged in Dignitatis Humanae), and all the other aspects of Americanism. But understanding the movements in the Church, Fr. Fenton feared the dangerous, possibly erroneous propositions of his prime theological opponent, Fr. John Courtney Murray, SJ, would be in some way embraced by the forthcoming Council. That, according to the histories, is what indeed occurred. Fr. Murray’s propositions are considered by most to form the basis for that most controversial portion of Dignitatis Humanae, regarding religious liberty.

Which is just one more small data point that Vatican II did not occur in a vacuum, but like all revolutionary movements, the dramatic event was planned and executed long in advance.

Our sick culture – Disney family planning cartoon from 1968 September 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in Abortion, Basics, contraception, disaster, error, foolishness, General Catholic, sadness, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society.
comments closed

At present, the vast majority of Americans practice very careful, very deliberate “family planning.” In point of fact, so does almost the entire world, to the effect that the overal global fertility rate has been plummeting ever since the promotion of “family planning” – the careful regulation and limitation of the number of births – became the formal policy of the United States and other “advanced” countries in the 1960s and 70s.  Outside of sub-Saharan Africa, worldwide, the birthrate has plummeted farther, and faster, than any time in recorded history.  In many developed countries, the birth rate has fallen so far that demographers are now forecasting demographic doom – many countries may experience severe economic hardship, social disorientation, and even ultimate collapse due to the near universal acceptance and rigid practice of deliberate child-limitation.

Selling people on eshewing one of the deepest human instincts – the desire to reproduce – was no mean feat.  It took quite a concerted effort to do so.  But once people caught on to the “trick” – that by having fewer kids, they might have more “freedom” and money to please themselves, at least for a short while (because the economic consequences of this childlessness are major drivers of the ongoing economic stagnation throughout the entire developed world, outside a few isolated exceptions) – the idea took off like wildfire.

How were they so convinced?  As with everything in our media-saturated culture, through careful indoctrination in print, audio, and especially visual media.  One example is this indoctrination is the Disney cartoon below, dated 1968, sent by reader D, who has sent me so much gold of late I should name him co-blogger!  Note, this video was produced at the behest of the radical Population Council, which was at that time, 1968, forecasting worldwide calamity if population growth did not cease immediately.  Some of the more extreme proponents of this misanthropic Malthusian nonsense proclaimed mass starvation and even cannibalism on a worldwide scale by 1980 unless their draconian plans for forced contraception and abortion were not implemented, immediately.  The elites, long proponents of limiting the “wrong sorts” of people, eagerly hopped on board, and by the mid-20th century, most elite institutions, including all the mainline protestant churches, were all eagerly promoting this population control rhetoric.  All that was left, was to indoctrinate the little people into disavowing God’s revelation and their own human nature, which proved, I think, much easier to do that may have been originally thought.

Thus, we got this:

I cannot believe people looked at videos like this and said “oh, that’s so reasonable and wise!”  They’re talking about children as if they are some horrific, life destroying, soul-sucking burden, instead of the gifts of God they really are! No wonder so many people in our present culture have such an intolerance of children, if not out and out antipathy! Also note, the video does not list any of the terrible side effects of “family planning,” so well forecast by Pope Paul VI: dire medical consequences from many contraceptive methods (including hugely increased cancer rates and death), increase in adultery, divorce, destruction of the family, objectification of women, increase in pornography, societal negativity towards children and large families, overall collapse in moral behavior and willingness to sacrifice, selfishness, etc., etc.

The video starts off very wrong.  Human populations in given areas rarely remained stagnant over long periods of time. They almost invariably tended to grow, save for periods of mass epidemic or social collapse (but, in turn, the collapse was often caused by falling population, as was the case with the Roman Empire, which fell at least in part because the Romans did not have nearly so many children as did the barbarians who overwhelmed them, externally and internally).

There is also a logical fallacy upon which the entire movie hinges: that the “old balance” was somehow the “right” one, and that a new balance with a far larger human population could not be attained. This was, and is, the constant error of the Malthusian misanthropes (many of which, I suspect, just don’t very much like their fellow man) – that resources would remain constant, at, say, 1970 levels, and that the resources we have at this moment would have to be divided among more and more people. What the misanthropes, in their blind ideology, failed to recognize, was that the very increase in population drove improvements in resource production across the board, so that not only was man able to provide for all these additional people, but their standard of living improved dramatically, as well.  Thus, the average person today, with 7 billion living human beings, has a much higher standard of living than the average person from 1950, when there were only 2.5 billion.

There is no fixed limit to what the earth can produce, nor what man’s ingenuity can invent. So, the entire idea of limited resources is really a fallacy, as we see with the oil industry. I remember in the mid-80s watching dumb films in science class from the early 70s, predicting the world would “run out of oil” by 1990 or something.  Even though the price of oil was, at that time, collapsing, and stayed collapsed for 15 years. As we see with the “unexpected” boom in fracking, where suddenly, the formerly moribund US oil production scene is now exploding, and we are even forecast to be energy independent in 20 or 30 years, technology and God-given human ingenuity simply cannot be discounted.  What was a certainty in the mid-1970s – that the US, and world, would run out of oil in 20 years or less – turned out to be utter fantasy.  As things look now, there are sufficient oil reserves to continue the presently oriented “hydrocarbon economy,” at current growth rates, for a century or more. And I expect that to only continue to increase.  The same can be applied to virtually any other industry.

Take farming.  Our farm in Kansas has been experiencing a terrible drought.  The milo planted in the spring has received maybe 2 inches of rain, and there have been many days of blisteringly hot weather and high, hot, south winds. It was 105 when we were there.  We expected the milo to be dead and shriveled to the ground. Wrong. On that 2 inches of rain, modern, improved, drought resistant seed varieties have made milo that will probably produce 80-100 bushels per acre.  A very solid crop.  On a tiny amount of rain.  And that is due to advances in agriculture that make such an incredible feat possible. Even more amazing, that’s not on summer fallow, that milo is growing on land that is continuous crop.  So, the soil has not had a year to build up moisture.

The rest of the movie is even worse. The gut-wrenching scenes of a formerly happy family reproducing themselves into misery, with nary a thought to the fact that those additional children could also provide for the family, and that 6 kids can better provide for two parents in their old age than 2. That is the situation the US now faces, where, very soon, each worker will have to support a retired or disabled person, instead of the situation of 50 years ago, when 30 or 40 workers supported each retiree.  Europe is already in this mess, and their economy shows it – stagnation, high unemployment, unsustainable debt, skyrocketing taxes, etc.

Thus, the construct of the modern world economy, with its built in assumptions (and eager participation in) very small family sizes and often brutally applied family planning (see China, India, others), is in essence a giant wealth transfer scheme. People, for a while, “enjoyed” greater wealth by having smaller families, but they got that wealth by stealing it from the future.  The future people needed to work, invent, and otherwise provide a comfortable retirement for today’s adults simply will not be there. And there are not sufficient developments in automation or any other technology to offset the lack of productivity that the small number of children will mean in the future.  Thus, our economy teeters on the brink of collapse, along with most of the rest of the developed world.

The Malthusians were more successful than they intended. And they may turn out to be quite right – the future may well hold economic catastrophe and social breakdown, all due to the issue of human reproduction.  But, this future calamity will not be due to too many children, but to too few.

The saddest part is that western Catholics are among the most eager and committed believers in both family planning and the Malthusian errors that drive its use.

Friday night Vigil at the Carmelites PLUS clothing ceremony on Sunday September 3, 2013

Posted by Tantumblogo in awesomeness, Basics, Dallas Diocese, General Catholic, Glory, Grace, Holy suffering, Interior Life, Latin Mass, religious, Sacraments, Spiritual Warfare, Tradition, Virtue.
comments closed

This Friday, Sept. 6, is the First Friday for September. Please come join the Carmelites for their all night vigil of prayer and reparation for the sins of the world and the restoration of the Church and Christendom!  Chapel opens at 5, this time, so note that. TLMs at 8pm and 3am, with Confession before and after by Fraternity priests. Vigil ends with Mass at 7am on Saturday.

The beautiful Carmelite Chapel is at 600 Flowers Ave in Dallas, 75211.  There is food available for your refreshment from your long hours of prayer!

All details here——–>>>>Allnightcarmelites_sept2013

The other blessed event occurring at the Carmelite Chapel this month is the clothing ceremony for Sister Christine Marie of the Mother of God, OCD. The clothing Mass is at 10am, and you can visit with Sister in the parlor prior to Mass, starting at 9:30.  In addition, there will be refreshments after.  The Mass will be Novus Ordo, offered Ad Orientem, and if it’s like previous Masses, there will be traditional hymns and some Latin mixed in.

You can also visit with Sister in the parlor after Mass.  If you go to Mater Dei, you could always drop by after the High Mass.

This is the last clothing/profession at the Carmel for 2013!  They’ve grown so much, what an incredible blessing for our Diocese, Church, and world!

CarmeliteSisterElizabethMarie.jpg

One final Carmelite note. Would you, in your charity, pray for PG, a devoted young lady who has experienced much suffering regarding her pursuit of a Carmelite vocation?  We spent some time with PG and her lovely family on our vocation, and they are all such wonderful people. I know PG has had some very trying times of late.  Please pray that God may show her the path He has in mind for her! She is such a lovely lady, I pray for only the best for her and her family, and that God’s beneficent Grace may work through these sufferings to produce enormous spiritual fruit.

Thank you so much.

Dominus vobiscum!