Saturday, 21 March 2015
Who's on first?
Perusing this morning's post by Barona at Toronto Catholic Witness blog, I discovered this:
Richard Gaillardetz Joseph Professor of Catholic Systematic Theology at Boston College said the above in the September 25, 2013 issue of the National Catholic Reporter as highlighted below:
I'm confused.
On March 2, 2015, LifeSiteNews reported the following:
It seems then that Father Thomas J. Rosica has plagiarised Richard Gaillardetz.
In other news.
Richard Gaillardetz Joseph Professor of Catholic Systematic Theology at Boston College said the above in the September 25, 2013 issue of the National Catholic Reporter as highlighted below:
I'm confused.
On March 2, 2015, LifeSiteNews reported the following:
It seems then that Father Thomas J. Rosica has plagiarised Richard Gaillardetz.
In other news.
Pope Francis on the death penalty - opinions are not magisterial
Vatican Radio reports that Pope Francis said that "no crime ever deserves the death penalty."
He has also said in the past that a life sentence is like a "death sentence." Presumably, it would follow that Charles Manson and Paul Bernardo should be let out of prison.
The Pope has a personal opinion and in my opinion, he is wrong.
This is no more magisterial than if he were to say tomorrow that the moon is made of creamed cheese.
The danger here is that the establishment Catholic media and others will use this for political argument. This Pope continues to invade into areas that are out of his league, as his comments on economics and the soon to come the environment encyclical display. Frankly, it is Marxist rhetoric. I am not calling the Bishop of Rome a Marxist but his rhetoric on these issues are not founded in the doctrine of the Church as articulated in the Catechism and seem to come from a 1970's mentality of South American Jesuits imbued with their heretical internationalist and liberationist theologies.
The Pope is entitled to his personal opinions. The Pope is not entitled to state it in such a way that it can be interpreted as Magisterial.
Vox.
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/03/20/pope_francis_no_crime_ever_deserves_the_death_penalty/1130871
He has also said in the past that a life sentence is like a "death sentence." Presumably, it would follow that Charles Manson and Paul Bernardo should be let out of prison.
The Pope has a personal opinion and in my opinion, he is wrong.
This is no more magisterial than if he were to say tomorrow that the moon is made of creamed cheese.
The danger here is that the establishment Catholic media and others will use this for political argument. This Pope continues to invade into areas that are out of his league, as his comments on economics and the soon to come the environment encyclical display. Frankly, it is Marxist rhetoric. I am not calling the Bishop of Rome a Marxist but his rhetoric on these issues are not founded in the doctrine of the Church as articulated in the Catechism and seem to come from a 1970's mentality of South American Jesuits imbued with their heretical internationalist and liberationist theologies.
The Pope is entitled to his personal opinions. The Pope is not entitled to state it in such a way that it can be interpreted as Magisterial.
Vox.
http://en.radiovaticana.va/news/2015/03/20/pope_francis_no_crime_ever_deserves_the_death_penalty/1130871
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm
Legitimate defense
2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an
exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that
constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a
double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the
aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not."65
2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality.
Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life.
Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to
deal his aggressor a lethal blow:
If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be
unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be
lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of
moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to
take more care of one's own life than of another's.66
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for
one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good
requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this
reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms
to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their
responsibility.
2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to
people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the
requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has
the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the
offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced
by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes
the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order
and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it
must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67
2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have
been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude
recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively
defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect
people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means,
as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good
and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state
has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an
offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the
possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the
offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically
nonexistent."68
Friday, 20 March 2015
Homosexual activist says gay ‘marriage’ isn’t about equality, it’s about destroying marriage
With the continuing anti-family and anti-marriage agenda this is a good time to reexamine it from the perspective of those who undertake it. Notice at the one minute mark the nervous laugh after she says she has "three kids who have, um, five parents, more or less." It is her guilty conscience. Ms Gessen knows not only that the concept is absurd but that it is fundamentally against the natural and moral law.
After you read this, please consider making a donation to Patricia Jannuzzi, recently fired from Immaculata High School in New Jersey for stating the obvious. You might also consider making a comment on the page to challenge the haters that are lurking there. Below this reprint from LifeSiteNews is an advertisement out today to run on Sean Hannity about Patricia and the phone number for her bishop who has permitted this travesty of justice. It is from Michael Hitchborn of the Lepanto Institute which recently exposed the practices of CRS - Catholic Relief Services which are against Catholic teaching.
Can you Voxers get it over $25,000 by 12 noon EDT?
From LifeSiteNews, May 1, 2013.
May 1, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Conservative pundits are saying that a homosexual activist exposed the hidden agenda behind homosexual “marriage” when she told an audience last year that the movement is not seeking equality but rather a total dismantling of the institution of marriage itself.
Masha Gessen, a journalist and author who campaigns for homosexual 'rights', made the comments last May in Australia on a panel at the Sydney Writer’s Festival. She said:
“The five parents break down into two groups of three,” she said. “And really, I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”
After you read this, please consider making a donation to Patricia Jannuzzi, recently fired from Immaculata High School in New Jersey for stating the obvious. You might also consider making a comment on the page to challenge the haters that are lurking there. Below this reprint from LifeSiteNews is an advertisement out today to run on Sean Hannity about Patricia and the phone number for her bishop who has permitted this travesty of justice. It is from Michael Hitchborn of the Lepanto Institute which recently exposed the practices of CRS - Catholic Relief Services which are against Catholic teaching.
Can you Voxers get it over $25,000 by 12 noon EDT?
From LifeSiteNews, May 1, 2013.
May 1, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Conservative pundits are saying that a homosexual activist exposed the hidden agenda behind homosexual “marriage” when she told an audience last year that the movement is not seeking equality but rather a total dismantling of the institution of marriage itself.
Masha Gessen, a journalist and author who campaigns for homosexual 'rights', made the comments last May in Australia on a panel at the Sydney Writer’s Festival. She said:
It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.
The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And again, I don’t think it should exist. And I don’t like taking part in creating fictions about my life. That’s sort of not what I had in mind when I came out thirty years ago.Providing her own life as an example for her advocacy to do away with marriage, Gessen described the complex family structure in which three children whom she parents live: one of them is adopted with her ex-partner, another - whom she birthed – has a biological father in Russia, and the third is the biological child of her current partner and Gessen’s brother. These three children have five adults in parenting roles, but not all five adults parent all three children.
“The five parents break down into two groups of three,” she said. “And really, I would like to live in a legal system that is capable of reflecting that reality, and I don’t think that’s compatible with the institution of marriage.”
* * *
Thursday, 19 March 2015
1,000,000 Catholics don't matter
Nope.
They just don't matter.
Not to John Allen.
From: Thomas Rosica [mailto:rosica@saltandlighttv.org]
Sent: March 24, 2011 2:53 PM
To: david.domet@xxxxx.com
Subject: For your VOX!
Source URL: http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/april-may-be-cruel-month-relations-traditionalists
More news for you and your VOX. May the Lord grant you the peace you are seeking this Lent. No
guarantees you will find it this side of the Resurrection but keep seeking.
Fr. Rosica
April may be cruel month for relations with traditionalists
By John L Allen Jr
Created Mar 24, 2011
For anyone hoping that longstanding ruptures between Rome and the traditionalist wing of the
Catholic church are on the brink of swift resolution, it may turn out that April is indeed the cruelest
month.
Sometime in early April, ...
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/april-may-be-cruel-month-relations-traditionalists
Indeed. Quite the email. Quite the report from John L. Allen, Jr.
Do these 1,000,000 plus Catholics matter?. As many have stated, they are a greater portion of the Church than Allen lets on. There may be 1.5 billion Catholics in the world but when you look at Europe and the Americas how many actually practice their faith.
If they are schismatics, which I content that they are not, then do they not matter? There is sure a lot of ecumenical outreach for heretics and interfaith outreach with those who deny Christ but precious little for these, our own brothers and sisters.
I am sorry for Bishop Williamson. I have great respect and sympathy for the bishops, priests and religious of the Society of St. Pius X and I understand the desires of those who worship at their chapels. I believe that one day Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre will be declared at least a Servant of God by the Church if not made Venerable. Who are we to say that the Holy Spirit was not acting through him to preserve the traditional Mass?
Father Zuhlsdorf and Father Hunwicke have some thoughts worth pondering.
As for Allen and company, they know and we know something. They have no progeny. There time is short, very short. They are working feverishly because they know it but they will not succeed.
They will fail.
This won't last much longer.
All we have to do is hold fast to the faith.
They just don't matter.
Not to John Allen.
One might wonder why any of this matters to the Vatican. The Society of St. Pius X claims a global following of around 1 million, which, if true, would represent .01 percent of the full Catholic population of 1.2 billion. Investing resources in trying to lure such a relative footnote back might seem disproportionate.Not to others whom we hoped would be more pastoral towards them.
From: Thomas Rosica [mailto:rosica@saltandlighttv.org]
Sent: March 24, 2011 2:53 PM
To: david.domet@xxxxx.com
Subject: For your VOX!
Source URL: http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/april-may-be-cruel-month-relations-traditionalists
More news for you and your VOX. May the Lord grant you the peace you are seeking this Lent. No
guarantees you will find it this side of the Resurrection but keep seeking.
Fr. Rosica
April may be cruel month for relations with traditionalists
By John L Allen Jr
Created Mar 24, 2011
For anyone hoping that longstanding ruptures between Rome and the traditionalist wing of the
Catholic church are on the brink of swift resolution, it may turn out that April is indeed the cruelest
month.
Sometime in early April, ...
http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/april-may-be-cruel-month-relations-traditionalists
Indeed. Quite the email. Quite the report from John L. Allen, Jr.
Do these 1,000,000 plus Catholics matter?. As many have stated, they are a greater portion of the Church than Allen lets on. There may be 1.5 billion Catholics in the world but when you look at Europe and the Americas how many actually practice their faith.
If they are schismatics, which I content that they are not, then do they not matter? There is sure a lot of ecumenical outreach for heretics and interfaith outreach with those who deny Christ but precious little for these, our own brothers and sisters.
I am sorry for Bishop Williamson. I have great respect and sympathy for the bishops, priests and religious of the Society of St. Pius X and I understand the desires of those who worship at their chapels. I believe that one day Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre will be declared at least a Servant of God by the Church if not made Venerable. Who are we to say that the Holy Spirit was not acting through him to preserve the traditional Mass?
Father Zuhlsdorf and Father Hunwicke have some thoughts worth pondering.
As for Allen and company, they know and we know something. They have no progeny. There time is short, very short. They are working feverishly because they know it but they will not succeed.
They will fail.
This won't last much longer.
All we have to do is hold fast to the faith.
They want to debase the truth. It is an attack on Christ and His Sacrifice. It is an attack on the Eucharist!
What is behind the attempt by Kasper, Marx, Tagle and and the others who are attempting to change doctrine through pastoral practice and a talk of "mercy" as if it is something never practiced in two thousand years?
It is about sacrilege and debasing the Holy Eucharist. It is about denying that the Mass is the Sacrifice of Calvary and debasing it to be the reenactment of the Last Supper rather than a re-presentation of that Sacrifice. If the Eucharist is just a meal, who are we to judge or restrict by law those who want to come? If they want to come, they must do as all of us. Repent of your sins with a firm purpose of amendment. Period. It is that simple. Are any of us truly worthy? Of course not, that is why we pray the Centurion's prayer three times, or once if we're more worthy as in the modernist rite. When we pray, "only say the word" the word is said in the confessional when the priest says, "Ego absolve te!" There is the healing. There is the mercy.
The Ordinary Form of the Mass, the Novus Ordo Missae is a sacrificial offering, assuming the form, matter and intent is there on the part of the priest. Sometimes, it is illicit even if it is valid. More than often, it is a "banal" product as then Cardinal Ratzinger called it. It is not possible that it can convert and convict in the same way as the the traditional form for its prayers are deficient and its celebration often not sufficient. The Mass according to the latest books by St. John XXIII was nearly eliminated. It was banished by those modernists who were out to undermine the faith and are now at their zenith. This form of the Mass more fully expressed the Catholic faith and the Sacrifice and there is no denying it. It is as straight forward as 2 + 2 = 4 and those who say otherwise want you to believe that it really equals 5.
They are at the height of their power now and they will come crashing down.
For your spiritual edification.
"A Meditation on the Holy Sacrifice of the
Mass"
By Michael Sestak
August 2014
Some days back, a viewer on YouTube forwarded a
kind request, asking me to produce a film showcasing the beauty and richness of
the Latin Mass. I started the project, but never imagined where it would lead.
I worked on the video each day after work from
7pm - 3am for five consecutive nights. It was a draining experience. But I am
satisfied with the end result.
PURPOSE
"A Meditation on the Holy Sacrifice of the
Mass" is not meant to be a mere inspirational drama, but a heartfelt
prayer, a Catholic meditation.
It should be viewed as such: Focused. Silent.
Penitent.
My sincere hope is that you will grow in your
love for God, and your Faith will be strengthened.
SYMBOLISM
After previewing the movie for my family, they
expressed concern about some of the symbolism, particularly the scene of the
Kiss of Judas and the priest kissing the altar. Please know that I based
everything on ancient Catholic teaching. For example:
"When the priest kisses the altar, he is
kissing Christ, *faithfully,* in contradiction to the kiss of betrayal by
Judas." In a sense, the priest is making atonement for the betrayal of
Judas.
"The priest reading the Introit represents
Christ being falsely accused by Annas and blasphemed."
"The priest going to the middle of the
altar and saying the Kyrie Eleison represents Christ being brought to Caiphas
and these three times denied by Peter."
"The priest saying the 'Dominus vobiscum'
represents Christ looking at Peter and converting him."
"The priest saying the 'Orate Fratres'
represents Christ being shown by Pilate to the people with the words 'Ecce
Homo.'"
"The priest praying in a low voice
represents Christ being mocked and spit upon."
"The priest blessing the bread and wine
represents Christ being nailed to the cross."
"The priest elevating the host represents
Christ being raised on the cross."
"The priest goes to the Epistle side and
prays signifying how Jesus was led before Pilate and falsely accused."
"The priest goes to the Gospel-side, where
he reads the Gospel, signifying how Christ was sent from Pilate to Herod, and
was mocked and derided by the latter."
"The priest goes from the Gospel side
again to the middle of the altar - this signifies how Jesus was sent back from
Herod to Pilate."
"The priest uncovers the chalice,
recalling how Christ was stripped for the scourging."
"The priest offers bread and wine,
signifying how Jesus was bound to the pillar and scourged."
"The priest washes his hands, signifying
how Pilate declared Jesus innocent by washing his hands."
"The priest covers the chalice after the
Offertory recalling how Jesus was crowned with thorns."
"The priest breaking and separating the
host represents Christ giving up His spirit."
Taken from "The Catholic Church Alone: The
One True Church of Christ" by the Catholic Education Company, New York,
page 551. The book has been out of print for many decades; used copies sell for
about $200.00 or more, but can be read freely on Google Books.
FINAL THOUGHTS by Fulton J. Sheen
Too many of us end our lives, but few of us see
them finished. A sinful life may end, but a sinful life is never a finished
life.
Our Lord finished His work, but we have not
finished ours. He pointed the way we must follow. He laid down the Cross at the
finish, but we must take it up. He finished Redemption in His physical Body,
but we have not finished it in His Mystical Body.
He has finished the Sacrifice of Calvary; we must finish the Mass.
Wednesday, 18 March 2015
Polish Bishops throw down the gauntlet to Synod manipulators: "People living in non-sacramental union deprive themselves of the possibility of receiving Holy Communion."
Richard Fitzalan, 11th Earl of Arundel; Thomas
of Woodstock, 1st Duke of Gloucester; Thomas de Mowbray, Earl of Nottingham;
Henry, Earl of Derby (later Henry IV); and Thomas de Beauchamp, 12th Earl of
Warwick, throw down their gauntlets and demand Richard II to let them prove by
arms the justice for their rebellion
The Polish Bishops have concluded their annual plenary. The story is now being picked up by Voice of the Family, LifeSiteNews and PewSitter showing the importance of the matter - the outright rejection of Holy Communion for the divorced and remarried.
Individual Catholics must look to the Bishops of Poland in addition to those whom we already know as being faithful to Our Lord Jesus Christ and the teachings of His Church.
Here is their statement which flies in complete contradiction to the modernists who would seek to approve sacrilege.
The original communique can be found at the Polish Episcopal Conference website.
In view of the upcoming Extraordinary Synod of Bishops in
Rome, the bishops have undertaken a reflection on marriage and family. This
reflection demonstrated the importance of the family from the perspective of
philosophical, theological and legal issues.
Identified once again was the indispensable importance of
the sacrament of marriage, and the family for the growth of Christian life
within the Church.
Emphasized was the need to promote the pastoral care of
families, to strengthen the faithful in understanding and the implementation of
sacramental marriage, as understood as a sacred and indissoluble union between
a woman and a man.
The teaching and the tradition of the Church shows that
people living in non-sacramental union deprive themselves of the possibility of
receiving Holy Communion.
Pastoral care must be provided for those living in such unions so that they may be able to keep the faith and continue in the community of the Church. Pastoral care of those in non-sacramental unions should also take account of children, who have the right to participate fully in the life and mission of the Church.
Pastoral care must be provided for those living in such unions so that they may be able to keep the faith and continue in the community of the Church. Pastoral care of those in non-sacramental unions should also take account of children, who have the right to participate fully in the life and mission of the Church.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)