A long time ago I made the error of judging the truth of a religious belief and system of beliefs, based upon the actions of a few that were leaders of a local congregation of that particular belief system. Hypocrisy can be found almost anywhere and among religious we look more intently for it if we are so inclined.

As it happened, I discovered that there were other reasons, sound legitimate theological reasons for leaving that faith community behind and I entered the Catholic Church. By then I realized that the truth of the faith is not measured by how seriously its adherents take it. Indeed, at the time I entered the Church the clerical abuse scandal in the Boston, Mass area was at its peak. But there had been other scandals and most recently it has been the same thing all over again in Ireland.

I think that in this case, while the details of the problem are terribly sad and a real indictment of the leadership of the Church in Ireland, the report that was commissioned was very instructive, and well worth reviewing for its clear assessment of what went wrong, who was responsible and what it was they were thinking.

Here’s an excellent article by Michael Kelly on that report called, The Wolves Roamed Freely.
(more…)

Well, the dissenters are at it again. There is even a new blog for a petition not to correct the errors in the English translation of the Mass, what is called the Ordinary rite by Benedict XVI.

Here’s the blog and a sampling of some of the links at the blog from the usual suspects.

Here.

Here.

Here.

Here’s a thought. The translation we are discussing, which Benedict XVI and the USCCB is attempting to correct, is an English translation of what is official in Latin. How is it such a terrible thing to want to get the English version to match the Latin standard?

I think that there is a theological basis for this. Without examining it in any detail, isn’t that an interesting commentary that some would want to keep a translation of something so integral to the Church as her liturgy, that is flawed? Why? What is there in the correction that offends them so much? Or is it just the fact that the Pope is exercising his proper authority over the liturgy that offends them?

Here’s a reminder of how seriously we should take the liturgical dissenters. Given a choice between these people and Benedict XVI? Is there any question?

…regardless of how I understand the doctrine Extra Ecclesiam Nulla Salus, whether in the strict sense of Fr. Feeney or in a more nuanced sense that seems to prevail in the thinking of the Magisterium including Benedict XVI and John Paul II, as evidenced in encyclicals and the CCC.

Let’s say just a word about EENS. (more…)

It would be nice to get the recording. Fascinating that the monastery has been going without interruption since 1133. That’s one that was out of the reach of the kings of England.

Did you know that the Big Bang theory of the beginnings of the universe originated from a Belgian priest?

Here’s Father Barron’s sermon from Sunday Jan. 3/2010 called;
Religion, Science and the Journey of the Magi: Feast of the Epiphany

Some other not well known facts in this sermon;

Pascal, Descartes, Newton, Copernicus all devoutly religious men. Gregor Mendel, father of modern genetics, a priest.
Georges LeMaitre, Belgian Catholic priest, big bang theory.

His list goes on, the point being that science is only possible with a Christian foundation and that the myth that the two are opposed in principle is just that, a myth.

For someone who had never heard of Jesus Christ, if we were to simply give them the Gospels and tell them to come back with any questions they might have, I’m sure there would be a host of questions.

When did this all happen? (more…)

24 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Whoever wishes to come after me must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow me.
25 For whoever wishes to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
26 What profit would there be for one to gain the whole world and forfeit his life? Or what can one give in exchange for his life?
27 For the Son of Man will come with his angels in his Father’s glory, and then he will repay everyone according to his conduct.
28 Amen, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.”

So what does he mean by this? (more…)

Carl Olsen at Ignatius Insight has another great post analyzing an article from Amy Sullivan in Time Magazine on the priestly celibacy “debate.”

Is it just me or does it seem that the most vocal advocates for removing the celibacy requirement for Roman Catholic priests are usually women? I don’t want to be uncharitable but is that because a man that does not primarily want to have sex is an unknown and dangerous quantity for at least some women? Does that make them uneasy because they cannot then know that they have men all figured out? Does it in some way pique them as women that they basically have nothing to offer such a man because he sees the Church as a higher order than womankind as such?

Does that passage from St. Paul irritate them as well where he says that a married man is concerned with the things of the world, how he can please his wife, whereas a celibate man can concern himself only with the things of God, and how to please him?

I’m just asking.

Check this out.  Just when you think you’ve seen it all.

A Nazi Italian Catholic priest who thinks Mussolini was a martyr?

Well, c’est la vie, say the old folks, it goes to show you never can tell.  We’ve seen our share of communist Jesuit priests in South America over the years, so I guess we shouldn’t be surprised there might be a few Nazis in Europe as well.  In either case, these men need to be disciplined at the very least, and likely some of them don’t belong in the priesthood.  They certainly don’t seem to understand that their vocation is supposed to be their life, not just their job, and they should have no time left over for radical politics.