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?

…from Thoughts Blog;

5th Sunday in Ordinary Time

Deuteronomy 17;
[2] “If there is found among you, within any of your towns which the LORD your God gives you, a man or woman who does what is evil in the sight of the LORD your God, in transgressing his covenant,
[3] and has gone and served other gods and worshiped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the host of heaven, which I have forbidden,
[4] and it is told you and you hear of it; then you shall inquire diligently, and if it is true and certain that such an abominable thing has been done in Israel,
[5] then you shall bring forth to your gates that man or woman who has done this evil thing, and you shall stone that man or woman to death with stones.
[6] On the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses he that is to die shall be put to death; a person shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness.
[7] The hand of the witnesses shall be first against him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. So you shall purge the evil from the midst of you.

(more…)

…for the Month of January 2010 are completed. This being the liturgical Year C of the Roman calendar.

You’ll find them at THOUGHTS.

I heard this on the news today and looked it up;

At least he has his priorities right and recognizes that the first duty of the Christian is to help those in trouble.

But this brings up an issue that seems to have infected a number of Protestant groups. Whether they are fringe or not is up to their peers to decide I suppose. But I think that it is one manifestation of something that has come to be known as a “prosperity gospel.”

This is perhaps the reverse side of that thinking, that disasters that happen are a result of the sin of those people involved. Well, if we look strictly at the Old Testament we can see a pattern there of disaster falling on Israel when they got away from God. But it must be remembered that they had a covenant with God, and it was not just religious but had to do with their lineage. That is why the sins of the fathers are visited on the sons.

But bad things happen to good people as well. How are we to explain that? Is it because of their sin specifically? Isn’t that just the inverse of the idea that God will bless you with good things, material wealth and health if you have enough faith?

We must remember that Jesus was asked a similar question;

John.9
[1] As he passed by, he saw a man blind from his birth.
[2] And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”
[3] Jesus answered, “It was not that this man sinned, or his parents, but that the works of God might be made manifest in him.
[4] We must work the works of him who sent me, while it is day; night comes, when no one can work.
[5] As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”
[6] As he said this, he spat on the ground and made clay of the spittle and anointed the man’s eyes with the clay,
[7] saying to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Silo’am” (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing.
RSV

Certainly, God can allow bad things to happen to people as a result of their own sin. Some sins carry their own punishment, such as drug abuse. But we must not pretend to judge the hearts of other people. It is difficult to avoid, and I am just as guilty of that as anyone at times.

Jesus’ answer is not an easy one to understand but we must accept it.
“…that the works of God might be made manifest in him.”

…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…)

I don’t entirely agree with his polar symmetry of error regarding the Intelligent Design theory and the atheists. There are nuances to ID and variations of theory that make this objection disappear.

Otherwise, thematically it is right on the mark, in my opinion.

Note: Thanks to Insight Scoop for the heads up.